<p>
</p>
<p>Nope. I thought it was gender neutral but apparently not.</p>
<p>What should we call you? Early learner?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>WHAT tiredness??</p>
<p>Sorry bedhead.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Watch McCain in any of his recent press appearances. He seems tired. But I know: you can’t see it. McCain probably seems as peppy as a 46-year-old to you…</p>
<p>As much as McCain would like this campaign to be about him (as well as those on the left including many of those who post here), this race is about Obama and nothing else. If he truly does capture the hearts of most Americans, he’s our next President. If he fails, he fails. </p>
<p>McCain is a sideshow. It almost doesn’t even matter who the Republicans are running. Americans will not be pulling the lever based on how they feel about McCain. Posters here can make fun of McCain’s supposed gaffes or his age or his mental sharpness. It doesn’t matter. It’s all about Obama.</p>
<p>Personally I think Obama has no chance of being elected. An astounding thought considering the price of gas and the overwhelming taxes we all pay.</p>
<p>bedhead - thanks for your concern about JSM. He might look tired to you, but he’s fine. As I mentioned earlier, he’s campaigned longer & harder than any other candidate. But that’s ok - he’ll just be that much more prepared to take office in Jan. BTW - I heard he’s planning to hike the Grand Canyon AGAIN this summer!</p>
<hr>
<p>This was an interesting read I found:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[RealClearPolitics</a> - Articles - The GQ Statesman](<a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/07/the_gq_statesman.html]RealClearPolitics”>The GQ Statesman | RealClearPolitics)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I swore I would take a break from political threads, but I had to hi-jack this comment. Zmom - did you ever play the board game Monopoly when you were young? We played it lots (referred to it as Monotony); anyway, as younger kids when we played, there’s was always giggling and kidding when someone landed on B&O Railroad because we would only associate it with body odor - it was the potty mind of kids.</p>
<p>I might as well jump in - one thing I’ve been very disappointed in with Obama has been his tendency to distance himself from the Muslim community. I understand why he does it, but I think it’s a shame that he feels he has to do it. When politicians try to distance themselves from various communities, they might as well come out and say there is something to be afraid of. I don’t believe that, but those actions will be taken that way and propogate the stereotype that Muslims are to be feared. I don’t think it’s stratetically the most genuine approach to tackling religious prejudice in our country.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>teriwtt - haven’t you noticed that Obama has a habit of “distancing himself” from anyone or anything which might be politically damaging?</p>
<p>The list is quite extensive if you think about it, and even includes such things as debates with John McCain, reporters & direct answers to questions!</p>
<p>Bz: Rather than quoting Tony Blankely who wouldn’t be ready to considered an assistant’s assistant to a Deputy Secretary of State, you might do well to do your own thinking.</p>
<p>What does winning Iraq mean? What it means is that we walk away from it leaving Iraq to govern itself. That is, we get out. Occupying Iraq in order to keep the lid on violence that is bursting out around the seams means we have lost. This isn’t a football game. The goal Bush set for this war was that Iraq would have a peaceful, Democratic govt. He tragically underestimated the impossibility – or difficulty – of doing this. So then he redefined success as leaving in place a govt. that can govern a unified Iraq. Talking about a dumbing down of this mission, already suggesting that in a real sense we had already lost the war. Now we have a govt. that is asking us to leave. The work of winning this war is up to the Iraqis. Obama understands this perfectly, and that is why I have supreme confidence in his judgement. What a bunch of hogwash it is for Blanklely to suggest he’s incomprehensible. Obama published an editorial “My Plan for Iraq” in the NYT. It outlined quite clearly Obama’s sense of the endgame in Iraq. The NYT wouldn’t let McCain publish his op-ed because it didn’t articulate a plan or a goal, according to the NYT, but just criticized Obama’s clear plan.</p>
<p>Go to the NYT website and search for “My Plan for Iraq” if you actually have any willingness to actually educate yourself.</p>
<p>Oh, and where is the vast majority of Americans on the subject?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obama: the man with a plan that the country needs and wants.</p>
<p>bz, could you at least try to find a source more credible than a neocon hack like Tony Blankley, an uncritical cheerleader for all of the “wonderful” things the Bush Administration has foisted on America? </p>
<p>I honestly would be just as non-plussed by a similarly obvious piece of dishonest bile directed at McCain or anyone else. That is the most juvenile bit of *****y, gossipy, substance-free tripe I’ve read in a long time. It reads more like a remake of “Heathers” than an attempt at serious political commentary.</p>
<p>
We have, however, seen a President do this.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I agree, although if McCain does something truly stupid he could make it about him and blow his chances.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Really? Every poll I see that counts up the electoral votes on likely state by state outcomes shows Obama winning. That could change before November, but based on how things are looking now, saying that Obama has no chance sounds more like a lot of wishful thinking on your part. </p>
<p>A few electoral polls:</p>
<p>[RealClearPolitics</a> - Electoral Map](<a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10]RealClearPolitics”>http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10)</p>
<p>[Electoral-vote.com:</a> President, Senate, House Updated Daily](<a href=“http://www.electoral-vote.com/]Electoral-vote.com:”>http://www.electoral-vote.com/)</p>
<p>[Election</a> Projection: 2008 Elections - Polls, Projections, Results](<a href=“Welcome electionprojection.com - BlueHost.com”>Welcome electionprojection.com - BlueHost.com)</p>
<p>If the people who object to BO and BHO also objected to the use of “Mc****” which I’ve seen on various political threads, they might have some credibility. That is outright slander, since the supposed incidence on which that is based could very well be complete fiction.</p>
<p>When I early on used the term “BO” in my mind I was pronouncing it “Beau.” A poster here chastised me even when I explained that, and said BHO was preferable. Now that same poster doesn’t care for BHO either.</p>
<p>These same posters have spewed such hatred toward GWB I would think they would be embarrassed, since, he, at least, is our president. Even though I was/am not a big GWB fan, that always bothered me.</p>
<p>Senator Barack Obama is not even president yet.</p>
<p>I agree with browninfall. It’s Obama’s to loose. It’s not about McCain. So far, stagnant at six points up and not moving, it looks very much like he may loose it. A lot of people just find his self-regard preposterous and ridiculous.</p>
<p>I don’t talk a lot about McCain here, but when I refer to McCain from now on, I’ll be sure to call him JSM, and refer to Senator Barack Obama as Senator Barack Obama, as is fitting such a great man. </p>
<p>Talk about silly!</p>
<p>On unequal press coverage: ever notice that you take fewer birthday pictures of your kids with each passing year?</p>
<p>besides, Obama looks cuter in a little pointy birthday hat.</p>
<p>and can we ditch ‘presidential’ as a positive description? Too many priors have affected that puffed up pose. Dignity will suffice,…</p>
<p>“On unequal press coverage: ever notice that you take fewer birthday pictures of your kids with each passing year?”</p>
<p>For adults with kids in college now, they should be taking more. It has never been cheaper and easier to take pictures than it is today. We didn’t take as many when the kids were younger as we had to pay for film and developing. Digital cameras get smaller, more powerful, come with more capacity and we can edit pictures - why not take more pictures? We have the mushrooming of websites that hold pictures. I’d argue that we’re taking more pictures than ever.</p>
<p>I’m fine with “Obama” and “McCain.” Even when “BO” is used as shorthand and without malice, I’d have a hard time warming up to it. If that makes me silly, so be it. I’ve been called worse. 
… I agree with you isla that Obama appears to hold himself in high esteem, but I have no problem with that. Anyone running for high office should–and probably does–think quite highly of himself or herself. I wouldn’t want a President who thought he/she was somehow inferior.</p>
<p>I’ve never, personally, been partial to the “he did it too” form of argumentation. I don’t think more than one poster used that derogatory term for McCain.</p>
<p>If initials were used consistently, I wouldn’t expect anyone had any silly motives. But the use for one candidate not the other, on a regular basis by quite a few posters, does make one remark at the coincidence.</p>
<p>Disengenuous R Us?</p>
<p>Goodness knows I’m not trying to be argumentative, and I don’t even know how I got dragged into this, but <em>more than</em> one poster used the term “Mc***.” I don’t think it’s necessary to name names.</p>
<p>I’m not partial to the “he did it too” form of argumentation either, but fair is fair. Did you chime in on the Mc*** threads, garland? “Malice” was more than just implied in the use of that nickname, I think.</p>
<p>I’m sure more than a few people are annoyed about my opinion about Senator Barack Obama, but it might be useful to just listen to my view instead of attacking me. I can tell you, I’m not the only one who feels this way. If you go back and read my posts, most of them cited the views of pundits: Gergen, Borger and Mitchell. I never once jumped on a poster for his/her view, but made a deliberate attempt to keep it impersonal.</p>
<p>I believe I said “it’s silly” not you are silly, Hindoo (you are not the only one here expressing a problem with the use of Senator Barack Obama’s initials, just to be clear), so don’t go pretending as if I called you a name! Thanks!</p>
<p>Yes, more than one poster used the term “McSame.” I assume that’s what you’re referring to. It’s only malicious if you think that being similar to George Bush in any way is a terrible thing!</p>
<p>It’s easiest just to use their name or their title with their name. Anything else and is just schoolyard bully stuff.</p>