McCain’s weekly radio address
By JR Hoeft | Saturday, August 9th, 2008 | Politics
Sen. John McCain delivers his weekly address, with his primary focus being energy. Here’s a snippet:
“Taking in my opponent’s performances is a little like watching a big summer blockbuster, and an hour in realizing that all the best scenes were in the trailer you saw last fall.
“In the meantime, let me take a stab at a plot summary of the Obama campaign: America is finally winning in Iraq, and he wants to forfeit. Government is too big, and he wants to grow it. Taxes are too high, and he wants to raise them. Congress spends too much, and he proposes more. We need more energy, and he’s against producing it. “
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Conservative to the core; liberal with his opinion! J.R. has been involved in politics for over a decade and has worked on several campaigns in Hampton Roads. He has served on the Executive Committee of the Republican Party of Chesapeake and the Central Committee of the Republican Party of Virginia. He is also the director of “Blogs United” in Virginia. E-mail J.R.. Follow J.R. on Twitter.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
15 Responses to "McCain’s weekly radio address"
Here’s a summary of the McCain campaign:
Obama bad! Obama bad! Obama bad! Drill! Obama bad! Obama bad!
It would really be nice to see the John McCain who was going to run an “honorable campaign about ideas”.
Honorable? I do believe that a person who has served his country for his entire life, including spending over six years in a POW camp in
Vietnam when he had the opportunity to leave before his peers is more than honorable.
The campaign is seeking to point out the clear distortions and misinformation and changing policies that switch as easy as the wind by the Obama campaign.
How else do you differentiate yourself when the other guy distorts?
I was curious, so clocked this address – 3:20 about Obama and his policies, 1:00 about his own. Also compiling his tv ads in July and August – 2:00 about McCain, 2:20 about Obama.
Apparantly its not just the “mainstream media” devoting more attention to Obama, its McCain’s own campaign.
As far as Obama campaign distortions, funny how factcheck.org seems to be calling out McCain almost 3-to-1 over Obama for “distortions” of the facts. And as for McCain going after Obama for changing positions? Pot (Drilling). Kettle (Bush tax cuts). Black (Ethanol).
The WaPO did a graphic of the McCain v. Obama websites, it was stunning the two each used the word “Obama” far, far more than any other word on the site. In fact, “McCain” wasn’t seen in any great number on either.
McCain is clearly not interested in speaking about his own record or his own policies, whatever they might actually be – and please spare me your POW speech.
Then don’t challenge McCain’s honor.
JR, can a man be honorable and yet commit dishonorable acts? I would say yes. You cite a period of McCain’s life that much of his public image is built on. It’s also obviously a time that greatly shaped his life, and helped build who he is. It’s this time and this sacrifice (among others) that makes him “honorable”. But then what about the parts that aren’t so honorable? Having an affair and leaving his disabled wife. Keating Five. Do these make him a “dishonorable” person? I don’t think so – on the balance the good outweighs the bad, and everyone makes mistakes. While i can’t speak for Ragnar, i would be inclined to think he may agree. Which is why he didn’t say McCain was dishonorable, but rather his current campaign was.
This is one of the reasons that Weaver, McKinnon and others left the campaign – they were concened about its tenor. Weaver has since even used the phrasing that the current crop of ads “diminishes” McCain. Again, the idea of an honorable man fielding a not-so-honorable campaign.
This is probably one of the reasons you see a lot of bile from the left towards McCain. A number of us actually liked McCain back in 2000 when he was running for the Republican nod. His maverick persona, his “straight talk”, all very appealing. But now, to many of us, it seems like he’s turned his back on who he is, and is doing “whatever it takes” to get elected. In his mind, maybe he feels the good he can do as president outweighs the bad of the mudslinging negative campaigning he has to do to get there – I don’t claim to know.
But either way, there is some sense of betrayal for those of us on the left who used to like McCain. We may not have agreed with all his policies, but we liked who he was.
He is not running “an honorable campaign about ideas” – as he promised. Stop using Sen. McCain’s time as a POW to spin this.
Jeremy-
Great comment. However, throwing around the “Keating 5″ thing is a bit unnecessary. McCain’s involvement (or rather lack thereof) has been well-documented. There’s just no “there” there.
Ragnar-
I think McCain has been more than open about his ideas and plan for leading this country. I agree with him on his energy, economic, and national security policies (which are the policies most important to me).
And, I think I made it clear a few days ago that I think these ads have run their course.
I also think that McCain’s character is based in large part by what happened in Vietnam. I won’t disregard that. It’s one of the main reasons I’m voting for him.
When are you going to quit spewing talking points and re-engage in the conversation? You’re acting like a troll.
JR – it is hardly a talking point.
I am honestly quite disappointed with the tact of the McCain campaign. I told my wife and a few others this past spring that, in my opinion, America would be lucky to have either Obama or McCain as President. Obviously I have a preference for the man I believe has the better character and plan – Sen. Obama, but I – for many of the reasons Jeremy points out – have a soft spot for John McCain. I believe he has been an honest and honorable man. He is a true hero – and in the 2000 campaign, he was without any doubt my candidate of choice. I preferred Sen. McCain over any other candidate from either party.
What is disappointing to me in this 2008 John McCain v. John McCain of 2000 is that a) Sen. McCain decided at some point over the past six months that he wanted to be President more than he wanted to adhere to his principles.
Where once John McCain railed against the religious right – he now embraces them, and while it is clearly a politically oriented move, and should be treated as such. It is still disheartening. Moreover, he modified his initial strong opposition to torture/ violating the Geneva Conventions (which if you hadn’t noticed, the military leadership adamently opposed/ opposes these alledged violations of international law), in any form or manner when he realized that those positions were not polling well – and in order to ensure the support of President Bush.
b) as we turn to the campaign, Sen. McCain said repeatedly that he wanted an honorable campaign of ideas. He even pledged not to negatively campaign. I naively – perhaps because of my affinity for the man – believed him. Unfortunately, again he seems to have decided that he wants to be President more than he wants to adhere to his own ideals and principles. He decided to turn as negative as Karl Rove did to him, or to John Kerry/ Al Gore.
I was actually shocked when I saw the first few ads air. I had told many folks that we would finally have a campaign where each side would present an agenda and ideas – and then we the voter would choose which plan we preferred. I was wrong. As soon as the McCain campaign accepted that they were losing, and realized how well their questionable mud-slinging was working – and you can see the fruits of their labors in the untruths repeated here on BD both by posters and commenters – they charged into it full force.
So, no I do not believe that John McCain is running an honorable campaign. And, I also do not believe that John McCain is anything other than a flawed mortal human being. Did he act honorably as a POW – you bet your ass he did. His actions in the face of the enemy is the example for every man or woman in uniform to follow. However – he is a mortal man, and not a myth, did he always acted honorably towards his first wife (not if you believe her comments) or in this campaign? I leave that for you and others to decide.
Ragnar, if you wanted a campaign of ideas, you must’ve been horribly disappointed throughout the Democratic primaries.
As expected, you’re not paying attention. But, it’s not like we’re worried about losing your vote…
Sorry, Ragnar. You could at least be interesting enough to pay attention to.
Authored as you pay attention to me… ironic and sad.
The Elephant Man had fans, too.
Really? Does that make sense to you o’ fan o’ mine?
Leave your response