(from Revolution newspaper #141, August 24, 2008)
From the Campaign Trail:
Barack Obama’s mission of “bringing us all together” included three major events over the past two weeks, heading into his acceptance speech Friday night at Mile High Stadium.
First, on August 16, Obama participated in the first exchange between the two Presidential candidates at Saddleback Church in Orange County. Participating in what was, in essence, the first debate of the ‘08 election at Rick Warren’s megachurch was a major move on Obama’s part to embrace and legitimize the imposition of Christian fundamentalism into all realms of society. Then, on Saturday, August 24, Obama announced that Joe Biden, would be his running mate. A long-time ruling class insider, Biden has not just been complicit with, but a key player in the whole development of the so-called “War on Terror,” a war for empire that has brought a million deaths to Iraq, and bloodshed and suffering across the Middle East. And Michelle Obama’s August 26 speech to the Democratic National Convention was a major statement—an acclamation of oppressive, patriarchal traditional family values.
Each of these events provoked new rounds of outrage from many of Obama’s supporters. But the basic question for those people is: Are they betrayals of Obama’s principles? Or examples of what Obama’s mission is all about?
With the goal in mind of trying to see both sides of the campaign this time around, I watched John McCain's portion of the Saddleback Faith Forum which aired originally on August 16th and I just got so frustrated. I had to comment on one thing in particular. He referenced wasteful spending in Washington. "My friends, we spent $3 million of your money to study the DNA of bears in Montana. Now I don’t know if that was a paternity issue or a criminal issue…(LAUGHTER)… but the point is, it was $3 million of your money. It was your money. And, you know, we laugh about it, but we cry - and we should cry because the Congress is supposed to be careful stewards of your tax dollars." My jaw dropped when I heard this. One, talk about a simplistic way of looking at this. My hypothesis is that they could have been studying the genetic diversity of the bears to determine the health of the environment and the bear population in the area. If you understood about disease and the environment at all this is not a waste of money. It is a way to try and possibly avoid environmental disaster.
Two, $3 million dollars is nothing compared to the billions of dollars spent on a war being fought in the wrong country. Al Qaeda was responsible for the attacks on the US on September 11, 2001. Al Qaeda was not based in Iraq or connected to Saddam. Instead, Iraq has become a new hotbed for Al Qaeda and a rallying point for extremists. That does not seem like billions of dollars well spent. In addition, Afghanistan is in terrible straights and we don't have the military left to do what needs to be done to get it back in line. We have lost so many young men and women that I believe didn't need to be lost. September 11th we lost lives to the terrorists. The rest have been lost to bad decisions, bad planning and bad management. I am proud to say Barack Obama is one of the few to have remained on the right path, in disagreement with the war and what was being funded and how the troops were being treated all along.
There may be waste in Washington but it's not the $3million dollars going to study the genes of bears in Montana.
A family member sent us a link to clips of the Saddleback Forum and asked my wife to watch them and come to her own conclusions. After watching several clips, other than saying watching them made her feel even more comfortable in her support of Senator Obama, she mentioned something that really separated the two candidates: Barack Obama was calm and thoughtful in his responses but John McCain appeared, well, angry. This got me thinking, Is John McCain just too angry to be the President of the United States?
Our country's position as a respected world leader is greatly diminished since we decided to invade Iraq unilaterally. Our next President must repair that or we risk being isolated and a target for attack either economically or through all-out war. Already countries like Russia, Iran and Venezuela are thumbing their respective noses at us because they know that we are overextended and can do nothing about it. China knows that as long as they own and buy our debt that we can say nothing about human rights abuses. There is nothing good that can come from this position and we must improve it. A President Obama would make a concerted effort to work with world leaders to improve our world standing, a President McCain would not.
Based on his posturing over the Russia/Georgia conflict, John McCain would have rushed to war with the Russians. He tastelessly taunted Iran with his "Bomb, bomb, bomb...bomb, bomb Iran" joke. Though he denies it, there is also the instance of the Nicaraguan offical that he reportedly "roughed up" as reported by fellow Republican Senator Thad Cochrane, R-Miss. Several current and former senators have expressed that they have been the brunt of his anger. Is this man a ticking time-bomb? Yes he is and the American public needs to know.
So here is my solution to the Senator McCain problem. I propose that in response to the bogus and repetitive "Not ready to lead" that the Obama Campaign respond with "McCain: too angry to lead." It will not take much to get people from both sides in Washington to verify his temper as being unfit for a President of the United States. It will also make Senator McCain very, very angry. At worst, the McCain campaign will have to back down on the attack dog tactics because it will make the American Public take notice of just how angry he is (angry little man.) At best, it will push him over the edge and can become a debate topic that he will lose. The message is also a fair contrast of character: it shows that, opposed to Barack Obama who is a voice of reason and gets angry only when necessary, Senator McCain has a fuse that is always ready to blow and is quick to retaliate. Whatever way you look at it, it is a win-win for the Obama Campaign and the United States.
Note:
Just be prepared for the McCain campaign to try to spin this one and have him say: "Yes, I'm angry and I'm angry because..." It must be framed such that it shows that his general temperament is in question and that he is dangerous in general because he cannot control it. John McCain seems to get angry simply because someone disagrees with him or he doesn't like somebody or something irrationally. It is not about his deep dislike of one or two issues, he is angry in general and the country can't afford a loose cannon in the White House in these times of trouble.
The following was my welcome letter to Joe Biden:
Raised in a politically active Republican evangelical household, as an adult I came to my own decision that in general the Democratic platform more closely lived out the Christian viewpoint than did the Republican Party with one exception. Each campaign I remained inactive as far as participation in the campaigns and voted for what seemed to be the lesser of two evils.
This is the first campaign where I have felt we have a candidate who understands the experiences and challenges each of us as Americans face daily and long term; and is willing to challenge Washington and America to change the long term patterns in government, economics and foreign policy. Sen. McCain's statement regarding foreign diplomacy and preferring "bully tactics" on the Rick Warren format from Saddleback Church should have been a warning signal to all of what is in store should his bid for the Presidency be successful. I'm so glad you've joined to partner with Sen. Obama with all the great qualities you possess to work as a team to defeat Sen. McCain in November and establish a successful Presidency and Vice-Presidency.
I've been very disappointed in the media's coverage of Sen. Obama's interview at the Saddleback Church this week. Although I thought he could have answered the question on when a fetus is entitled to rights/protection and the question regarding the strings that federal funding places on faith-based activities better, his handling of and his positions on all the other questions were inspiring and dead on. Overall, his answers were much more responsive and profound than Sen. McCain's, yet the media highly praised McCain's performance and focused ad nauseum on Obama's "above my pay grade" comment. Now tonight, we're hearing that H. Clinton wasn't really vetted for the VP slot, and other such nonsense. CNN's new claim is that it is independent and unbiased. What can be done to also push it (and other media outlets) to be less superficial, more analytical, and more accountable for the very important role that they play in our society?
I watched enough of the Obama-McCain confab with Rick Warren last Saturday night to develop at least two observations.
You can read a full transcript here.
My first thought is that a significant segment of the American public has a rather unhealthy obsession with the religious views of presidential candidates in spite of the fact that the framers wrote a "no religious test" clause into our constitution.
I've always appreciated that clause, even though we've never done a good job living up to it.
The framers certainly seem to have understood that the quickest was to disqualify an otherwise capable decision-maker from office was to subject him/her to a spiritual litmus test.
This topic actually came up in my Washington Center small group meeting earlier this week when one of my international students asked me why Americans talked about religion so much during elections. For most of them, this was a very odd topic to focus so much attention on during a presidential campaign.
In light of the religious test clause, I suggested that there were any number of "unofficial" qualifications we use for candidates and religious faith is just one of them.
The second observation is that Barack Obama should get points for just showing up to visit with Rick Warren and his minions at Saddleback Church. It appeared to me that it was a McCain-friendly audience and that Obama's answers were a little too brainy and reflective for a largely knee-jerk, conservative audience.
And while Pastor Warren has received high marks for this event, I'm not really sure it helps most voters all that much when candidates are interrogated for an hour about about something as personal as their faith or their prayer life.
Moreover, what's going to happen if some other best-selling evangelical minister decides that he wants to conduct an interview with Obama/McCain in the next few weeks? I'd like to think that both campaigns will have enough sense to say "No thanks, we think we've had enough of this..."
Maybe you have some better thoughts than I do.
Please man up Senator Obama!
Senator Obama has to shed the warm fuzzy guy for a few rounds and go toe to toe with Mr. McCain. Of course McCain is attacking his patriotism, and he'll do it again, because he knows Senator Obama will let him. Obama's response to McCains amped up Rhetoric is basically "don't say those things about me." What? Throw a punch Barack, even us peace loving liberals know that sometimes you have have to retaliate against the bully. Mr. Obama's campaign people are doing a horrible job at advising the senator and getting him back on his game. First of all - the venue at The Saddleback Church was a horrible mistake and the only person that won here was Rick Warren. What did Senator Obama expect to gain out of this forum? I wonder if Bishop T.D. Jakes had invited Mr. Obama, would he have gone? I don't think so.
I guess even in this arena, the Senator has to distance himself from African-Americans. Politics is a rough and tumble game; fortunately to bring John McCain down a notch or two only requires telling the truth about him and his voting record, on veterans issues and much more. Expose Mr. McCain for his lack of real vision, his dangerously short temper (why is no one talking about this) and posturing as some sort of tactical military strategist. Senator Obama should stop prefacing everything he says about John McCain with "I respect Senator McCain's Service,"; it sound too conciliatory and has the hollow ring of "with all due respect." What is with the bizarre hero worship in this country anyway? Progressives must figure out a way to frame patriotism within a progressive context, or we will continue to lose the Presidency to bumper sticker politics. If Senator Obama is not careful, he will only have himself to blame for losing to the worst presidential candidate in a very long time. Senator McCain's own base neither wants or respects him - rabid miscreants that they are - they only want to hold on to power just a little longer.
The neo-cons have unfinished business in the Middle-East and losing The White House will definetly have an impact on their agenda, but who knows, private contractors like Blackwater are now functioning in a military capacity. Because we don't have the guts or the sense in this country to elect men like Dennis Kucinich, Senator Obama will have to do. Senator Obama's base is growing weary and confused. RE-ENERGIZE YOUR BASE MR. OBAMA! Stop trying to imitate these small town-hall gathering like McCain - it doesn't work for you.
Mr. Obama draws large crowds and this is where he shines. Senator Obama draws large crowds, because people like his message of hope, while Senator McCain is willing to say anything in order to win this election. Get off the ropes and get back in the game! Stop reacting to conservatives and frame the the discussion. Obama has to stop running against McCain and run against the conservative agenda which has left our country in a mess.
Stop repeating the attacks, and attack McCains own judgement. How many more wars does Mr. McCain want to fight? The neo-cons are salivating at the thought of reconstructing the cold war, which means more military build-up, more wars, more defense contracts. Can someone please tell the truth about what is going on in Georgia or least show some footage of all the dead Ossetians that they murdered? I am astonished that there are still Americans who believe that conservatives can be trusted with the future of this country. Mr. Obama this race is yours to lose - take McCain to task and tie the Bush Administration around his neck.
NEW YORK (CBS/Politico) -- He clashed with their leaders in his 2000 campaign. He struggled to gain their votes during the 2008 primaries. And he still doesn’t spend much time talking about the issues they consider most important. But after Saturday night’s televised forum at the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., John McCain has taken an important step toward shoring up his support among the Republican Party’s Christian conservative base.
CONT.
John McCain says he plans to consult with Democratic Rep. John Lewis when he's president. That's news to Lewis.
During Saturday's presidential forum at Rick Warren's California megachurch, John McCain was asked to name the "three wisest people" he would "rely heavily on" if elected president. He didn't cite close confidantes Phil Gramm and Randy Scheunemann, possibly because they have gotten McCain into trouble politically. Instead McCain chose Gen. David Petraeus; former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, one of his economic advisers; and Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), a leading figure in the civil rights movement. This is not the first time McCain has invoked Lewis' name on the campaign trail. Earlier this year, in Selma, Alabama, he told the story of civil rights marchers trying to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge in a 1965 march from Selma to the state capital of Montgomery. Waiting at the crest of the bridge were a brigade of police and state troopers who meted out an attacks so violent that the day is known today as Bloody Sunday.Central in McCain's telling was John Lewis, a man of just 25 who was at the front of the march and absorbed the first blow. Millions of Americans, McCain noted, "watched brave John Lewis fall."
But even though McCain has now repeatedly cited Lewis as a role model and potential adviser, McCain has not established a relationship with the Georgia Democrat in the 22 years they have served in Congress together. At the time of McCain's Selma speech, a Lewis associate told my colleague David Corn that McCain has never been close to Lewis. Lewis was not told about McCain's speech in Selma in advance, nor was he invited to attend. In response to McCain's latest invocation of his name, Rep. Lewis said in a statement requested by Mother Jones, "I cannot stop one human being, even a presidential candidate, from admiring the courage and sacrifice of peaceful protesters on the Edmund Pettus Bridge or making comments about it." But, he added, "Sen. McCain and I are colleagues in the US Congress, not confidantes. He does not consult me. And I do not consult him."It took McCain years to fully embrace the goals that Lewis was fighting for on Bloody Sunday. In 1983, McCain voted against making Martin Luther King Jr.'s birthday a national holiday, in opposition to most members of Congress, including many of his Republican colleagues. In 1987, the governor of Arizona repealed the state's recognition of King; McCain supported the move. It was only in 1990, 25 years after Lewis marched in Alabama, when Arizona reversed its decision that McCain changed his own stance on the issue.And there are, of course, the fundamental differences between John McCain's political philosophy and the goals of Lewis and his fellow marchers. Lewis hoped that the federal government would use its influence to protect the rights of disenfranchised individuals; he sought an expanded role for government because of what he believed was government's power to do good. It explains, in part, why Lewis is a Democrat today and supports Barack Obama for president. McCain, on the other hand, is a fanatical enemy of government spending and has said, "I've found over time that less government involvement is better." It's a philosophy that would have left Lewis and his cohorts out in the cold.So why does John McCain promise to consult a man who he is not close to and has never consulted before? I put the question to the McCain campaign. If and when they respond, I'll update the post.
Jonathan Stein
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/08/9293_john_mccain_john_lewis_wise_man.html
More here:
Let’s hear from Tom and Tina then my comments will follow:
First from Tom:
Now from Tina:
Now my comments:
My independent opinion references the religious test given the Candidates on August 16, 2008. I did not like the Right-wing pundits getting their way on this subject because it says right in the constitution no President should be given a religious test to gain office. I agree with that creed. State and Religion should be separate and so it should remain. The subjects brought up by the Religious right-wing populist only give cover for the inapt and those who do not know how to serve the greater good for this country. We proved that in the 2000 and 2004 elections. We must move away from these so-called moral issues and agree to disagree based on our various religious beliefs. As a free society, I have the right to worship anyway I please as well as every American in this country. NoOne has a corner on G-O-D in America. Therefore, I do not nor others do not have the right to tell me/you how to believe regarding morals/values system. Not in this country! I found many oversights in the “Saddleback show” and I would like your opinion on these open questions:
How many prepared questions were given to McCain before he appeared before Pastor Warren on Saturday, Aug 16th? Was there a TV in the Limo that drove McCain to the forum or a Blackberry perhaps?
Why did McCain's Story about His Christmas Day experience as a POW sound like a scene from a movie...Benhur perhaps?
Why was McCain asking about questions regarding the Supreme Court Justices before the question was presented to him?
Was this Saddleback Forum Show presented for the Religious Right-Wing/Ultra Conservatives to obtain their support for McCain as President?
Why was McCain's Adultery treated so Lightly at this religious forum as one of his personal moral failures? He was allowed to just say, The failure of his first marriage. Did he or did he not commit adultery while his wife was facing a major illness?
Why did Pastor Warren only warn Obama several times not to give canned answers as given on the campaign trail but never curved any of McCain's Canned campaign trail answers?
Since there was extra time, why did Pastor Warren omit asking McCain about his Church and His pastor since we know all about Obama’s?
Curious about the answers to those questions, send me a message so we can contact the media to find out when the answers to these questions will be aired.
Saturday Night’s Political Forum hosted by Pastor Rick Warren was one of the most interesting campaign events this year. It was nice to hear someone from the right argue that it is essential that Americans (both conservative & liberal) learn to argue their viewpoints WITHOUT demonizing the other side. In coming to terms with the idea that we are all Americans (even when we disagree) we build upon the idea that we are greater as a nation together than we are as the sum of our separate ideologies.
I had this nagging recollection that John McCain was a member of the Keating 5.
I was right. The McCain's and Cindy's father were involved in investments with Charles Keating and his dealings back in the 80's and 90's. For a complete explanation of the Keating 5, see the Wikipedia entry for Keating Five. If you are don't put much faith in Wikipedia, you can Google it.
The bottom line: John McCain was identified as a member of the Keating Five. John McCain directly and indirectly benefited from Charles Keating in business deals and lavish vacations (which he later paid for). In the end, John MacCain was cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[18][17] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf. Keating called McCain a "wimp" behind his back.
Can we afford 4 or even 8 more years of Poor Judgment?
After seeing John McCain at Rick Warren's Saddleback Church, all he can offer is a sound bite presidency. When asked does evil exist and if so how would he handle it? Ignore it, negotiate with it, confront it or defeat it. McCain could hardly contain himself while Rick Warren asked the question. He belted out "Defeat it!" Okay, that made the congregation of Saddleback Church erupt with applause. As opposed to Obama's measured response... without a single sound bite. What I got from his response was: Evil exists in every aspect of life and we need to address it accordingly.
Evil exists in dependency. How do we defeat Meth addiction with success rate of less than 4%?
Greed is evil. In less than 20 years we went from junk bonds to junk mortgages. John McCain's power and wealth can keep him cloaked from impropriety from his role in the Keating 5, but never from his exercising "poor judgment."
John McCain acts like the presidency is an entitlement and we are obligated to honor his turn. In our volatile world of Russia's resurgance as a dominating aggressor, Iran's aggresive behavior, and a worthless dollar, we need a leader like Obama... not a bottom feeder like McCain.
Take a look at this latest video by Brave New Films. It it one of us, a middle class American, describes her experiences as she and her family lost their house to foreclosure. Juxtaposed against that is a series of clips which highlight (1) John McCain's complete lack of empathy and (2) the fact (one systematically ignored by the traditional media) that he and his wife own 6 houses and a corporate jet. If you saw McCain at Saddleback Church this weekend you saw that he thinks that to be rich in America you need to make something like $5 million a year! Now I don't know if that is too much, or too little, I do know however that in this whole country less than 1/10th of 1 percent of the people earn that much money in a year. In the America I grew up in and the one I think we need to move back to being, the rich constitute a bit more than .001 of the population.
Oh what a forum indeed....
At first glance the Saddleback Forum on the Presidency had every hint at being a quality event, unprecedented in recent American history. As a result, Barack Obama saw a genuine opportunity to address a section of the population that, without a doubt, has had little exposure to Obama's messages. The political calculations of the Obama campaign were astute enough to correctly identify that for Obama, attending this event was win-win. Chances are most people in the audience that night weren't going to vote for Obama to begin with, so in effect, Obama had nothing to lose that evening. On the other hand, John McCain III had everything to lose. McCain III had to perform and perform well, for the audience expectations were quite high. Whether he personally prefers it or not, the evangelical audience at the Saddleback is his base in the 2008 election. McCain had to speak the words the audience wanted, even needed, to hear. He had to energize them. McCain III had to have a good night or risk dampening the enthusiasm of the evangelicals, perhaps ultimately spelling doom for his candidacy. As a result, McCain III felt the pressure that night. Perhaps this is the reason why the McCain III campaign felt the need to cheat or at a minimum gain an unfair advantage. Saddleback carried the highest stakes of any event of his candidacy so far, and it was an event that they simply could not lose. A majority of Americans were shocked to hear that McCain III was not actually in the "cone of silence" that he was billed to be, however, I for one was not. McCain's history is dubious at best, and some would argue that throughout McCain III's political career dishonesty and misdirection have been the hallmarks on which his career is based. The cloud surrounding the Saddleback Forum is beginning to overshadow McCain III's performance that night, perhaps to his regret. But the fact now remains, that the "cone of silence" in which McCain III was suppose to be in was a lie. His campaign has now admitted that he was, in fact, en route to the Saddleback megachurch arriving a full 30 minutes into Obama's discussion. The McCain campaign has asked the public to "trust him" as McCain was not listening to the questions nor did he receive any coaching or advanced warning of what was to be asked. Nevermind the fact that it would have been all too easy for McCain III to get this unfair advantage, for all he would have had to do is turn on the radio in his motorcade vehicle. However, if he wanted plausible deniability, which I believe was the case, all he would have needed was a staffer to listen to Obama's discussion with pastor Warren and then coach him prior to taking the stage. This line of rationale is supported by the fact that McCain III perpetuated the "cone of silence" statement in one of his first comments of the night, by saying "I was trying to listen through the wall." McCain III specifically knew that he wasn't backstage as he was billed to be, yet he supported this myth to his benefit. Throughout the night McCain III also appeared to be answering pastor Warren’s questions prior to them being asked. Go back and watch, specifically at 1 hour 19 minutes. This is where McCain III asked to get back to Supreme Court Justices before he was ever asked a question about Supreme Court Justices. McCain III immediately went into damage control, by saying that the issue of Supreme Court Justices was important to the issue being discussed and that is why he so weirdly brought it up. Even pastor Warren joked, that McCain III knew his questions before they were asked. Regardless of the attempted damage control McCain III went into, he still let the cat out of the bag right there, for there was no reason for him to mention Supreme Court Justices at that specific moment. Coincidentally, McCain III slipped up again further into the discussion when he responded to a merit based pay for teachers question. Actually, Pastor Warren asked three (3) questions in immediate succession on this issue. Prior to asking the set of questions to McCain III, he immediately gave 3 answers, saying “Yes, Yes, and find bad teachers another line of work.” Coincidentally, the answers McCain III gave happen to appropriately answer the questions which were soon to be asked. The McCain campaign brushed this off by saying that McCain III was joking on stage and what he did say matches perfectly with what he has been saying on the campaign trail. This very well might be the case, but McCain screwed up by specifically answering 3 questions. How did McCain III know to answer 3 questions and not 2, 4, or 5? He incriminated himself by specifically answering 3 questions. There is no other way to have known that unless he knew the questions before hand or was coached before hand.
I’m somewhat convinced that there are even more examples of McCain III accidentally demonstrating that he had prior knowledge of the questions being asked while he was on stage at Saddleback. I challenge anyone and everyone to go back a review the tapes and/or transcripts with a fine-tooth comb. The evidence is there. Lets not let this issue die, because McCain III’s actions surrounding this event shows his true character and intentions as being a man that is willing to lie, cheat, and steal if it will help his chances of winning the White House. In his mind, such behavior is justified because McCain III and his campaign staffers feel they are the “True” Americans, the “Real” Americans. Lets demonstrate to them once and for all that this is NOT the case. Lying, cheating, and stealing are not “middle-class American family values,” the same family values that the Republican party so loudly champions as their own. Lets break the monopoly the Republican party holds on family values, because if McCain III is weak on any character issue, its family values…..
I can't believe the reporting on the 'conversation with Rick Warren'.
It was not a debate as is now being described. It was set up, by a preacher, in a church, to be a conversation with Warren for the purpose of allowing the American public to 'see in to the hearts' of these 2 men.
McCain seized the opportunity to turn it in to a campaign speech. Obama, took Warren on his word and complied by being very open about what makes him tick, how he feels about things, you know, the retrospective thinking involved in spirituality.
Obama let the public in to his heart, so-to-speak. McCain showed us, without any pretense, that he is an agent of WAR.
I am so shocked at the small mindedness of the masses. Of the obvious love for hate and war. If that is what being an Evangalist is, then I am so thankful I am not anything like them. It seems, their God likes war just as much as the radical middle-eastern God likes war.
I like the God that Obama believes in. One with discernment, humility, honor, compassion, empathy, forgiveness, and dare I say it, love.
Rev. Rick Warren, the megachurch pastor of Saddleback Church and author of bestseller "A Purpose Driven Life", interviewed both Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama. The candidates' respective responses clearly delineated the differences of their ideas and approaches to date. While some pundits found comfort in the confidence of McCain's clear black and white, right and wrong world, Obama offered a nuanced version of the world as it is, not as we would like it to be. The Washington Post's On Faith moderator, Sally Quinn, said it best in her op-ed:
"[After listening to McCain's confident spiel,] I want to live in a world where Gen. David Petraeus and Meg Whitman, former chief executive of eBay, are the wisest people I know, where offshore drilling will help ease our energy crisis, where a guy stays in a Vietnamese prison camp even when told he could get out, and has great stories to tell. I want to live in a world where I was absolutely certain that life begins at conception, where a man is a maverick and stands up against his Senate colleagues when he disagrees with them, where the only thing to do with evil is defeat it, where a guy will follow Osama bin Laden to the gates of Hell to capture him...."
I would rather live in McCain's world than Obama's. But I believe that we live in Obama's world."
10. I was taking a nap. I wanted to be in top form. As you can see from my performance, it worked!
9. I was watching the Olympics. That Misha Phelps is an excellent swimmer!
8. Interrupt my suppertime? I don’t think so.
7. I was working on my weekly Presidential radio address.
6. Kept mulling over whether to use sandal or stick in my “dirt in the cross” Christmas story.
5. My motorcade was held up by the local paparazzi.
4. I don’t usually work weekends.
3. I got caught up in prayer for Georgia and Florida.
2. Me? Follow the rules? I’m a maverick!
1. My friends, I’m a P.O.W. How dare you question my integrity!
