<p>Actually, McCain did not meet with the Canadian PM, but it wasn’t for lack of trying. His campaign requested a meeting when he was to be in Ottawa but Harper declined, and arranged to be out of town that day.</p>
<p>Obama’s speech in Germany was the front page story in Canada’s top two newspapers today, The Globe and Mail which is a national paper, and the Toronto Star. Headlines were: Obama Hailed by 200,000, and The Road to the White House: Then He Took Berlin.</p>
<p>It is such a nice change to see an American politician hailed and cheered, instead of reviled and the subject of protest.</p>
<p>Andrea Mitchell realized that her redneck comment a couple of weeks ago just went too far, and since then, she has completely moved away from the memo supplied by MSNBC to worship Obama to now reporting objectively.</p>
<p>If he HAD visited the wounded soldiers, Obama-haters would have castigated him for using them as a “photo op.” No matter WHAT he does or does not do or say, it will never be good enough as far as some of you tough critics are concerned.</p>
<p>Some (not all) of the sources the anti-Obama-ites have been citing are ridiculously biased to the right. Maybe I should start quoting Michael Moore or Al Franken in an effort to denigrate McCain or Bush? :)</p>
<p>Could you guys at least make up your mind? Talk about flip-flopping:</p>
<p>One minute its:
a) Obama gets too much media attention, what with the American media following him all over the Middle East & Europe, daily interviews, constant coverage of every detail of his trip.</p>
<p>The next its:
b) The Obama campaign is to be faulted for not allowing the press greater access, so there could be even more coverage of the campaign.</p>
<p>There’s a difference between real information and Evita-like adoration. Of course, Senator Obama wants coverage–he just wants to control what kind.</p>
<p>I have this weird sense that this presidential election will parallel the outcome of the last American Idol. Somehow the voters just won’t obey their orders from the experts.</p>
<p>I didn’t see this level of control in the Clinton campaign and I think that the McCain campaign lacks the discipline to control his message tightly. This level of discipline and control reminds me more of the campaigns of the current President. Seems to me to be a professional thing in managing message and maintaining staff discipline with Rove and now Axelrod.</p>
<p>In the zealotry of the moment, I hope Senator Obama is not hoist by his own petard…or by the excited hubris of his overly enthused staff.</p>
<p>Love, to thrive, needs to be requited, nurtured, flattered and coddled; not only love but the vanity of romance needs constant flirtation and affirmation: The press needs a smooch…or at least a flirtatious glance.</p>
<p>“Arrogance” is the working-definition of an ex-lover by the spurned lover.</p>
<p>The reasons given for Obama’s cancelled visit to wounded soldiers in Germany may explain what happened in Afghanistan–the so-called fake interviews. The Obama campaign was told that Obama could only bring a few members of his staff and no press. The visit would be covered by the military press. that is exactly what happened in Afghanistan, which led to Andrea Mitchell’s snarky comments.</p>
<p>Regarding Woodwork’s comments: It has struck me that Obama’s campaign is extraordinarily disciplined, especially compared with Clinton’s and McCain’s. The limited access given to the press is part of this discipline–the desire to control the message at all times. It has become counterproductive; Obama could benefit from loosening up a bit more, too. I don’t know if it’s hubris or its opposite–lack of confidence.</p>
<p>Lack of confidence? Marite, you can’t possibly think that after reading his speeches! Here is a very telling comparison of two Illinois politicians courtesy of the Protein Wisdom website:
<p>The Senator: Just getting his sea-legs.
The Staff: Hubris.</p>
<p>Stickershock,
I too see a dramatic distinction between the attitudes and world views of our most human president and the front-running Senator in this election (both from the land of Lincoln).</p>
<p>Although, I attribute this mainly to the times. The world, to my mind no longer produces men like Abraham Lincoln. We produce --at our best-- learned egotists. At our worst, the current President.</p>
<p>While Senator Obama may feel free to hoist his own petard as a representative of Illinois, I am much concerned he’d take the US with him as President, were he to hoist it (and US) then. ;)</p>
<p>OK. Since Obama is so despicable for uttering terrible words of hope and inspiration (that draw international crowds of 200,000-plus), I’ll toss out a few very special McCain quotes. Undoubtedly, the world will find these endearing.</p>
<p>“Maybe that’s a way of killing them.” --Responding to a report that $158 million in cigarettes have been shipped to Iran during Bush’s presidency despite restrictions on U.S. exports to that country, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, July 8, 2008</p>
<p>“F**k you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room.”
–to Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), during a testy exchange about<br>
immigration legislation</p>
<p>“There are neighborhoods in Baghdad where you and I could walk through those neighborhoods today.”
–Prior to visiting a Baghdad market while being flanked by 22 soldiers,<br>
10 armored Humvees, and two Apache attack helicopters</p>
<p>“You know that old Beach Boys song, Bomb Iran? Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.”</p>
<p>“Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father.” --At a 1998 Republican fundraiser</p>
<p>“Make it a hundred…That would be fine with me.” -to a questioner who asked if he supported President Bush’s vision for keeping U.S. troops in Iraq for 50 years</p>
<p>Hindoo - read what you quoted me - I said he would’ve been respected if had gone PRIVATELY. </p>
<p>And even the press would’ve admired him if he’d given the word out that the military was limiting media coverage & he went anyway.</p>
<p>And about those McCain quotes in post #397 - none of those bother me one bit. Not nearly as “arrogant” as Obama’s comment about people clinging to guns & religion and dislike (or whatever) of those “not like them” - it concerns me that he thinks he’s “in the mind” of the people (and to be so off-track to boot!). That one statement is much more REVEALING and SCARIER than all McCain comments combined. (Ok - the “bomb Iran” song was scary, but it was obviously a JOKE).</p>
<p>I still would not call it hubris. I think the staff (and Obama) suffer from being overcautious, especially now that he’s in general election mode and needs to appeal to voters beyond his base. That means Clinton supporters, independents and possibly, Republicans. We’ve seen that in some of the votes he’s taken.</p>
<p>As for his sea-legs: he is a very fast learner. Truman had no foreign policy experience and he was thrust into the presidency with little preparation. But he was quick and did a great job.</p>
<p>Like I say, biz–I admire your devotion to McCain. I’d surely want you on my side were I running a political campaign! Are you in PR, by any chance?</p>