Ouch Johnny Reb, Ouch - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

zz0011 · 02-07-2006, 03:40 AM

Posted on Sen. McCain's web site @ http://mccain.senate.gov/index.cfm?f...ontent_id=1654

Quote:

MCCAIN RELEASES LETTER TO OBAMA
For Immediate Release
Monday, Feb 06, 2006

Washington D.C. *– Today, Senator McCain sent the following letter to Senator Obama regarding ongoing Congressional efforts towards bipartisan lobbying reform. The following is the text from that letter:

February 6, 2006

The Honorable Barack Obama

United States Senate

SH-713

Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Obama:

I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform legislation were sincere. When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership’s preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006 elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your letter to me dated February 2, 2006, which explained your decision to withdraw from our bipartisan discussions. I’m embarrassed to admit that after all these years in politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical rhetorical gloss routinely used in politics to make self-interested partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion, but please be assured I won’t make the same mistake again.

As you know, the Majority Leader has asked Chairman Collins to hold hearings and mark up a bill for floor consideration in early March. I fully support such timely action and I am confident that, together with Senator Lieberman, the Committee on Governmental Affairs will report out a meaningful, bipartisan bill.

You commented in your letter about my “interest in creating a task force to further study” this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth. The timely findings of a bipartisan working group could be very helpful to the committee in formulating legislation that will be reported to the full Senate. Since you are new to the Senate, you may not be aware of the fact that I have always supported fully the regular committee and legislative process in the Senate, and routinely urge Committee Chairmen to hold hearings on important issues. In fact, I urged Senator Collins to schedule a hearing upon the Senate’s return in January.

Furthermore, I have consistently maintained that any lobbying reform proposal be bipartisan. The bill Senators Joe Lieberman and Bill Nelson and I have introduced is evidence of that commitment as is my insistence that members of both parties be included in meetings to develop the legislation that will ultimately be considered on the Senate floor. As I explained in a recent letter to Senator Reid, and have publicly said many times, the American people do not see this as just a Republican problem or just a Democratic problem. They see it as yet another run-of-the-mill Washington scandal, and they expect it will generate just another round of partisan gamesmanship and posturing. Senator Lieberman and I, and many other members of this body, hope to exceed the public’s low expectations. We view this as an opportunity to bring transparency and accountability to the Congress, and, most importantly, to show the public that both parties will work together to address our failings.

As I noted, I initially believed you shared that goal. But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us. Good luck to you, Senator.

Sincerely,

John McCain
United States Senate

Ustwo · 02-07-2006, 03:48 AM

Hehehehe maybe I could start to like McCain.

smooth · 02-07-2006, 04:37 AM

This kind of shit posturing is going to cost McCain a large number of people and respect. He's lost a measure of mine and my wife when I show her in the morning.

It attracts people like Ustwo, and my wife's dad, as it's intended to do since he needs to slide to the right as we move into election mode. But it sloughs off huge chunks of the middle and Gen X and Y'ers--the moving target of voters, btw, who I think will come into force about the time Barak comes into play. The disrepsect isn't even veiled--McCain just alerted me to his asshole side and I had actually thought he was a pretty solid guy, all things considered.

flstf · 02-07-2006, 05:42 AM

So a senator from one party is upset that a senator from another party lied to him in private and then decides to whine about it in a letter that he publishes for all to see. Are we to believe that McCain is really all that surprised and feels he must apologize for his inability to anticipate that another polititian would lie to get a political advantage. He can't be that naive.

ratbastid · 02-07-2006, 06:24 AM

Wow. I really thought McCain was above partisan posturing like that. I confess, I'm disappointed with what I see this letter.

Is he predicting Obama running for the Dem nomination for the 2008 presidential election? Is that why he has to dig at him now, to preempt a very popular potential opponent?

Toaster126 · 02-07-2006, 09:29 AM

This thread is a great example of the ability people have to see what they want to.

JustJess · 02-07-2006, 09:43 AM

Okay... I am honestly confused. I am agreeing with people I don't normally agree with and disagreeing with those I do, not that that's the end of the world.

It's self-serving to put this on his website, but other than that... what about this letter is shady? On his website. Not on the news sites, no news conference announcements that I know of... so please, why does this negatively reflect on McCain? I generally like him...

smooth · 02-07-2006, 10:13 AM

JustJess,

It's not shady, it's just rude.
This letter is a Senator's version of calling the other person a liar and a fatmouth.

@Toaster
How do you interpret the following sentence?

"But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us."

In this sentence alone,
1. McCain implies Obama is only interested in exploiting a political issue
2. insults Obama over his junior status in the senate (twice)
3. accuses Obama of being deceitful in his claims that he wanted to work toward a bi-partisan agreement
4. concludes Obama is not interested in preserving the public interest

Interestingly enough, McCain is upset because he claims Obama is playing politics. McCain has built his reputation on the fact that he doesn't play politics himself. Yet, this publicly published letter about a private disagreement is playing politics--so it comes across to a number of us as hypocritical.

If anyone has an understanding of this letter as anything other than McCain lamenting that he tried acting like a non-partisan, but Obama just coudn't stop acting like a Democrat despite saying he would, I'd like to hear that alternative way of interpreting this letter.

stevo · 02-07-2006, 10:23 AM

Maybe he is genuinely upset because he actually did believe barak. Maybe at first he had second thoughts. He may have felt that maybe this guy is trying to play politics and run me for a fool, but then he second guessed himself, saw barak as a fresh senator less corrupted by politics than, oh say, senator kennedy, and decided to take a chance on the guy. It backfired and obama turned out to be no different than any other dem senator (save lieberman) and he decided to let everyone know.

Ustwo · 02-07-2006, 10:59 AM

Obama is the light at the end of the left wing tunnel right now, their one bright spot in 2004 when he beat...Allen Keys.

Any attack on him will piss of the left, direct, indirect or otherwise.

Oh how I remember Dan Rather gushing on about Obama when he won, it was the only time his grizzled face light up in a night that was pure dispare for his kind.

Of course putting on his website was bad 'politics' what he should have done was sent it and then have it magically 'leaked'.

smooth · 02-07-2006, 11:01 AM

yeah, stevo,

or maybe barak obama is a fresh senator who isn't trying to play politics at all but actually has a heartfelt disagreement on certain issues with McCain.

in that case, McCain ought to agree as a senator ought to disagree and has always in the past and vote or corrrepsond with the person in question--not publicly denigrate the person for his inexperience and cast aspersion on his intentions claiming that he is only after his party's interest rather than the public good.

Now see, in partisan politics, either member of a party often will take a disagreement and attribute it to irrational adherence to party policy. In the real world, reasonable people will agree that sometimes people just have different ideas about how things ought to be done. And both understand that the other just has a different notion of how best to implement policy that would serve the nation's interest. McCain claims to be part of the latter group, but his letter reads like it's coming from the former.

Elphaba · 02-07-2006, 11:05 AM

Quote:

You commented in your letter about my “interest in creating a task force to further study” this issue, as if to suggest I support delaying the consideration of much-needed reforms rather than allowing the committees of jurisdiction to hold hearings on the matter. Nothing could be further from the truth.

I got the impression from the above that Obama thought McCain intended a stalling tactic. These two need some face time in my opinion.

NCB · 02-07-2006, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Wow. I really thought McCain was above partisan posturing like that. I confess, I'm disappointed with what I see this letter.

Is he predicting Obama running for the Dem nomination for the 2008 presidential election? Is that why he has to dig at him now, to preempt a very popular potential opponent?

Has it even occured to you that it was Obama who was partisan posturing?

Kadath · 02-07-2006, 01:08 PM

Response from Obama:

Quote:

February 6, 2006

The Honorable John McCain
United States Senate
241 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear John:

During my short time in the U.S. Senate, one of the aspects about this institution that I have come to value most is the collegiality and the willingness to put aside partisan differences to work on issues that help the American people. It was in this spirit that I approached you to work on ethics reform, and it was in this spirit that I agreed to attend your bipartisan meeting last week. I appreciated then - and still do appreciate - your willingness to reach out to me and several other Democrats.

For this reason, I am puzzled by your response to my recent letter. Last Wednesday morning, you called to invite me to your meeting that afternoon. I changed my schedule so I could attend the meeting. Afterwards, you thanked me several times for attending the meeting, and we left pledging to work together.

As you will recall, I told everyone present at the meeting that my caucus insisted that the consideration of any ethics reform proposal go through the regular committee process. You didn't indicate any opposition to this position at the time, and I wrote the letter to reiterate this point, as well as the fact that I thought S. 2180 should be the basis for a bipartisan solution.

I confess that I have no idea what has prompted your response. But let me assure you that I am not interested in typical partisan rhetoric or posturing. The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you nor my willingness to find a bipartisan solution to this problem.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator

Elphaba · 02-07-2006, 02:09 PM

Thanks, Kadath. It looks like some sort of misunderstanding afterall. Classy response.

ratbastid · 02-07-2006, 02:47 PM

Hunh. Weird. It's not at all like McCain (or at least, the public face of him that I'm familiar with) to fly off the handle. SOMETHING must have prompted his letter.

McCain definitely comes off as the asshole here, and Obama comes off as the class act. Shame, because I really do like McCain.

alansmithee · 02-07-2006, 03:03 PM

Just wondering, is McCain an asshole now because he's not going against a Republican? Because from my perspective, that's the only logical reading of what people posted in this thread. McCain's ok when he's the Republican maverick, taking shots at Bush and the GOP's people. But apparently attacking the above reproach Democrats puts him in the wrong.

martinguerre · 02-07-2006, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alansmithee

Just wondering, is McCain an asshole now because he's not going against a Republican? Because from my perspective, that's the only logical reading of what people posted in this thread. McCain's ok when he's the Republican maverick, taking shots at Bush and the GOP's people. But apparently attacking the above reproach Democrats puts him in the wrong.

He's known for a slow fuse, tho.

He barely shot back over the race baiting push polls in 2000...and when he did it was pretty much too late.

The timeline on this one doesn't seem to make much sense...it'll be interesting to see more on what prompted the exchange.

points to obama for not firing back. it remains to see if he can keep 'em, or if mccain had a reason afterall.

alpha phi · 02-07-2006, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Hunh. Weird. It's not at all like McCain (or at least, the public face of him that I'm familiar with) to fly off the handle. SOMETHING must have prompted his letter.

McCain definitely comes off as the asshole here, and Obama comes off as the class act. Shame, because I really do like McCain.

I agree, There is a puzzle piece missing here.
Was some disinformation passed to McCain,
by someone who dosen't want corruption reform passed?
Was a dirty trick played by Obama in order to have a valid reason not
to work with McCain, and still look the good guy?

host · 02-08-2006, 02:03 AM

My opinion is that John McCain's hypocrisy knows no bounds, and that he is not fit to hold elective office because he has a history of not knowing right from wrong, or of representing the best interests of his constituents.

Here are examples (From Dec., 2005, and in Sept., 1989) of McCain's flawed ethics and penchant for putting his own interests ahead of what is best for his constituents, and for you and me....

Quote:

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10266650/

MR. RUSSERT: Let me turn to corruption, and here's a headline from the Philadelphia Inquirer: "Lobbyist Jack Abramoff helped fuel conservative successes, but his dealings could lead to a powerful ethical fallout ... Christian Coalition founder Ralph Reed, antitax guru Grover Norquist, members of Congress, Administration officials, and a host of lobbyists have been drawn into Senate or Justice Department investigations of Abramoff's lobbying activities. ... The Abramoff story `is breathtaking in its reach,' [Sen. John] McCain said."
Do you expect indictments?

SEN. McCAIN: Oh, sure. And lots of them. This is--this town has become very corrupt. There's no doubt about it. And we need lobbying reform. We need to have some reform of lobbying. But the system here, where so much is done in the way of policy and money, in appropriations bills where line items are put in in secret, which nobody knows about or sees until after they're voted on, is the problem. That's the problem today. So therefore, someone who wants some money or a policy change hires a lobbyist who is well connected. They go to the appropriate subcommittee or committee, appropriations, and they write in the line item. That part has to be fixed, I think, as much as anything else.

MR. RUSSERT: Senator, you said you're going to follow the money, but are you also going to investigate which legislators may have taken money and used that to influence legislation, to write into law what you're suggesting...

SEN. McCAIN: Tim...

MR. RUSSERT: ...the behavior of senators, your colleagues? Are you going to investigate them?

SEN. McCAIN: The--I will not, because I'm a chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee. This was brought to our--this whole thing started--was brought to us--attention by some disgruntled tribal council members in a small tribe in Louisiana, and we took it as far as we thought was our responsibility, which is where the money ends up. I'm not as--we are responsible for Indian affairs. We have an Ethics Committee. We have a government--we have other committees of Congress, but we also have a very active media. And believe me...

MR. RUSSERT: Does the Ethics Committee work?

SEN. McCAIN: I don't think...

MR. RUSSERT: In all honesty?

SEN. McCAIN: I don't think the Ethics Committees are working very well. The latest Cunningham scandal was uncovered by the San Diego newspaper, not by anyone here...

Quote:

http://www.azcentral.com/specials/sp...cainbook5.html
Chapter V: The Keating Five

Bill Muller
The Arizona Republic
Oct. 3, 1999 12:12 PM

As a war hero and U.S. senator, John McCain's life has been chronicled in pictures.

There are grainy mug shots of a young McCain, printed in U.S. newspapers after his jet was shot down over North Vietnam. There are black-and-white images of his return, grinning and waving, his hair turned prematurely gray by 5 1/2 years of malnutrition and torture in a Hanoi prison camp.

In happier times, there is McCain holding his newborn daughter while his wife, Cindy, smiles from her hospital bed.

But it is an innocent vacation picture that symbolizes McCain's Achilles heel and carries the reminder of the scandal that threatened his political career.

In the picture, which was taken in the Bahamas, McCain is seated on a bandstand while wearing an outrageous, straw party hat. Next to him on the dais, a bottle tipped to his lips, sits Charles Keating III, son of developer Charles H Keating Jr.

McCain calls the Keating scandal ''my asterisk.'' Over the years, his opponents have failed to turn it into a period.........

....But McCain made a critical error.

In spinning his side of the Keating story, McCain adopted the blanket defense that Keating was a constituent and that he had every right to ask his senators for help. In attending the meetings, McCain said, he simply wanted to make sure that Keating was treated like any other constituent.

Keating was far more than a constituent to McCain, however.

On Oct. 8, 1989, The Republic revealed that McCain's wife and her father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center in April 1986, a year before McCain met with the regulators.

The paper also reported that the McCains, sometimes accompanied by their daughter and baby-sitter, had made at least nine trips at Keating's expense, sometimes aboard the American Continental jet. Three of trips were made during vacations to Keating's opulent Bahamas retreat at Cat Cay.

McCain also did not pay Keating for the trips until years after they were taken, when he learned that Keating was in trouble over Lincoln. Total cost: $13,433.

When the story broke, McCain did nothing to help himself. When reporters first called him, he was furious. Caught out in the open, the former fighter pilot let go with a barrage of cover fire. Sen. Hothead came out in all his glory.

''You're a liar,''' McCain snapped Sept. 29 when a Republic reporter asked him about business ties between his wife and Keating.

''That's the spouse's involvement, you idiot,'' McCain said later in the same conversation. ''You do understand English, don't you?''

He also belittled the reporters when they asked about his wife's ties to Keating.

''It's up to you to find that out, kids.''

And then he played the POW card.

''Even the Vietnamese didn't question my ethics,'' McCain said.

The paper ran the story a few days later. At a news conference, McCain was a changed man. He stood calmly for 90 minutes and answered every question.

On the shopping center, his defense was simple. The deal did not involve him. The shares in the shopping center had been purchased by a partnership set up between McCain's wife and her father.

But McCain also had to explain his trips with Keating and why he didn't pay Keating back right away.

On that score, McCain admitted he had fouled up. He said he should have reimbursed Keating immediately, not waited several years. His staff said it was an oversight, but it looked bad, McCain jetting around with Keating, then going to bat for him with the federal regulators.

Meanwhile, Lincoln continued to founder.

In April 1989, two years after the Keating Five meetings, the government seized Lincoln, which declared bankruptcy. In September 1990, Keating was booked into Los Angeles County Jail, charged with 42 counts of fraud. His bond was set at $5 million.

During Keating's eventual trial, the prosecution produced a parade of elderly investors who had lost their life's savings by investing in American Continental junk bonds.
'THE ULTIMATE SURVIVOR'
In November 1990, the Senate Ethics Committee convened to decide what punishment, if any, should be doled out to the Keating Five.

Robert Bennett, who would later represent President Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones case, was the special counsel for the committee. In his opening remarks, he slammed DeConcini but went lightly on McCain, the lone Republican ensnared with four Democrats.

''In the case of Senator McCain, there is very substantial evidence that he thought he had an understanding with Senator DeConcini's office that certain matters would not be gone into at the meeting with (bank board) Chairman (Ed) Gray,'' Bennett said.

''Moreover, there is substantial evidence that, as a result of Senator McCain's refusal to do certain things, he had a fallout with Mr. Keating.''

McCain, the ultimate survivor, had dodged another missile.

Among the Keating Five, McCain received the most direct contributions from Keating. But the investigation found that he was the least culpable, along with Glenn. McCain attended the meetings but did nothing afterward to stop Lincoln's death spiral.

Lincoln's losses eventually were set at $3.4 billion, the most expensive failure in the national S&L scandal.

McCain also looked good in contrast to DeConcini, who continued to defend Keating until fall 1989, when federal regulators filed a $1.1 billion civil racketeering and fraud suit against Keating, accusing him of siphoning Lincoln's deposits to his family and into political campaigns.

In the end, McCain received only a mild rebuke from the Ethics Committee for exercising ''poor judgment'' for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating. Still, he felt tarred by the affair.

''The appearance of it was wrong,'' McCain said recently. ''It's a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.''

McCain noted that Bennett, the independent counsel, recommended that McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation.

''For the first time in history, the Ethics Committee overruled the recommendation of the independent counsel,'' McCain said. ''I'm sure it had nothing to do with the fact that I was the only Republican of the five and the Democrats were in the majority (in the Senate).''

But McCain owns up to his mistake:

''I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment.''

If you or I extorted or defrauded money to the tune of milions of dollars from Indian tribes, do you think that John McCain would investigate and push for indictments against us?

alpha phi · 02-08-2006, 02:44 AM

Host-
one event does not create a "history of not knowing right from wrong"
and like the second article says

Quote:

But McCain owns up to his mistake:

He has been actively pushing reforms ever since.
Striving EXTRA HARD to do the right thing
most likely a result of being caught up with the Keating five.

The Abramhoff scandel has become a conflict of intrest
in the Indian Affairs Committee,
therefore it must be handled by the ethics committee.
As I'm sure you see in the news it is being delt with.

As far as his temper.....at least he has some balls
for that I respect him more.

sailor · 02-08-2006, 07:19 AM

My take is bad information from both parties. No biggie, and nothing to get anyone's panties in a knot over. A misunderstanding, nothing more.

ratbastid · 02-08-2006, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sailor

My take is bad information from both parties. No biggie, and nothing to get anyone's panties in a knot over. A misunderstanding, nothing more.

Well, okay, but... McCain's letter was pretty vicious. I guess I'd like to see a response to Obama's response. Otherwise he just looks like a jackass.

ratbastid · 02-08-2006, 10:47 AM

Wow... This is really interesting...

As <a href="http://www.wonkette.com/politics/john-mccain/maverick-senator-john-mccains-wednesday-anger-list-153562.php">this Wonkette post</a> points out (in typical humorous, over-done Wonkette style), there have been five or six articles in the last couple days about McCain being angry about various things.

What's going on here? He's traded on this image as mature, level-headed, and above the fray. Is he trying to butch up his image for a run in 2008?

stevo · 02-08-2006, 11:00 AM

Barak and McCain had an agreement that they would work on a bipartisan corruption reform bill. They agreed to put party posturing aside and do what is right for the senate and the country. The worked on this bill together. McCain had basically a drafted bill in his hand when Obaba, under pressure from harry reid, announced that the democrats had a corruption reform bill and no republicans would be sponsors on it. That is what McCain is pissed off about. He was completely had.

Marvelous Marv · 02-11-2006, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Hunh. Weird. It's not at all like McCain (or at least, the public face of him that I'm familiar with) to fly off the handle. SOMETHING must have prompted his letter.

McCain definitely comes off as the asshole here, and Obama comes off as the class act. Shame, because I really do like McCain.

While I disagree about who was the asshole, those who have known McCain since before his POW days will recognize familiar behavior.

He was one hell of a party boy back then, too.

02-07-2006, 03:48 AM	#2 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Hehehehe maybe I could start to like McCain. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

02-07-2006, 04:37 AM	#3 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	This kind of shit posturing is going to cost McCain a large number of people and respect. He's lost a measure of mine and my wife when I show her in the morning. It attracts people like Ustwo, and my wife's dad, as it's intended to do since he needs to slide to the right as we move into election mode. But it sloughs off huge chunks of the middle and Gen X and Y'ers--the moving target of voters, btw, who I think will come into force about the time Barak comes into play. The disrepsect isn't even veiled--McCain just alerted me to his asshole side and I had actually thought he was a pretty solid guy, all things considered. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

02-07-2006, 09:29 AM	#6 (permalink)
Toaster126 Extreme moderation Location: Kansas City, yo.	This thread is a great example of the ability people have to see what they want to. __________________ "The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me." (Ayn Rand) "The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply uncomfortable, unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments, propelled by our discomfort, that we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers." (M. Scott Peck)

02-07-2006, 09:43 AM	#7 (permalink)
JustJess Unencapsulated Location: Kittyville	Okay... I am honestly confused. I am agreeing with people I don't normally agree with and disagreeing with those I do, not that that's the end of the world. It's self-serving to put this on his website, but other than that... what about this letter is shady? On his website. Not on the news sites, no news conference announcements that I know of... so please, why does this negatively reflect on McCain? I generally like him... __________________ My heart knows me better than I know myself, so I'm gonna let it do all the talkin'.

02-07-2006, 10:13 AM	#8 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	JustJess, It's not shady, it's just rude. This letter is a Senator's version of calling the other person a liar and a fatmouth. @Toaster How do you interpret the following sentence? "But I understand how important the opportunity to lead your party’s effort to exploit this issue must seem to a freshman Senator, and I hold no hard feelings over your earlier disingenuousness. Again, I have been around long enough to appreciate that in politics the public interest isn’t always a priority for every one of us." In this sentence alone, 1. McCain implies Obama is only interested in exploiting a political issue 2. insults Obama over his junior status in the senate (twice) 3. accuses Obama of being deceitful in his claims that he wanted to work toward a bi-partisan agreement 4. concludes Obama is not interested in preserving the public interest Interestingly enough, McCain is upset because he claims Obama is playing politics. McCain has built his reputation on the fact that he doesn't play politics himself. Yet, this publicly published letter about a private disagreement is playing politics--so it comes across to a number of us as hypocritical. If anyone has an understanding of this letter as anything other than McCain lamenting that he tried acting like a non-partisan, but Obama just coudn't stop acting like a Democrat despite saying he would, I'd like to hear that alternative way of interpreting this letter. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

02-07-2006, 05:42 AM	#4 (permalink)
flstf Easy Rider Location: Moscow on the Ohio	So a senator from one party is upset that a senator from another party lied to him in private and then decides to whine about it in a letter that he publishes for all to see. Are we to believe that McCain is really all that surprised and feels he must apologize for his inability to anticipate that another polititian would lie to get a political advantage. He can't be that naive.

02-07-2006, 06:24 AM	#5 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Wow. I really thought McCain was above partisan posturing like that. I confess, I'm disappointed with what I see this letter. Is he predicting Obama running for the Dem nomination for the 2008 presidential election? Is that why he has to dig at him now, to preempt a very popular potential opponent?

02-07-2006, 10:23 AM	#9 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	Maybe he is genuinely upset because he actually did believe barak. Maybe at first he had second thoughts. He may have felt that maybe this guy is trying to play politics and run me for a fool, but then he second guessed himself, saw barak as a fresh senator less corrupted by politics than, oh say, senator kennedy, and decided to take a chance on the guy. It backfired and obama turned out to be no different than any other dem senator (save lieberman) and he decided to let everyone know. __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

02-07-2006, 10:59 AM	#10 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Obama is the light at the end of the left wing tunnel right now, their one bright spot in 2004 when he beat...Allen Keys. Any attack on him will piss of the left, direct, indirect or otherwise. Oh how I remember Dan Rather gushing on about Obama when he won, it was the only time his grizzled face light up in a night that was pure dispare for his kind. Of course putting on his website was bad 'politics' what he should have done was sent it and then have it magically 'leaked'. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

02-07-2006, 11:01 AM	#11 (permalink)
smooth Junkie Location: Right here	yeah, stevo, or maybe barak obama is a fresh senator who isn't trying to play politics at all but actually has a heartfelt disagreement on certain issues with McCain. in that case, McCain ought to agree as a senator ought to disagree and has always in the past and vote or corrrepsond with the person in question--not publicly denigrate the person for his inexperience and cast aspersion on his intentions claiming that he is only after his party's interest rather than the public good. Now see, in partisan politics, either member of a party often will take a disagreement and attribute it to irrational adherence to party policy. In the real world, reasonable people will agree that sometimes people just have different ideas about how things ought to be done. And both understand that the other just has a different notion of how best to implement policy that would serve the nation's interest. McCain claims to be part of the latter group, but his letter reads like it's coming from the former. __________________ "The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann "You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman

02-07-2006, 02:09 PM	#15 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Thanks, Kadath. It looks like some sort of misunderstanding afterall. Classy response.

02-07-2006, 02:47 PM	#16 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Hunh. Weird. It's not at all like McCain (or at least, the public face of him that I'm familiar with) to fly off the handle. SOMETHING must have prompted his letter. McCain definitely comes off as the asshole here, and Obama comes off as the class act. Shame, because I really do like McCain.

02-07-2006, 03:03 PM	#17 (permalink)
alansmithee Junkie	Just wondering, is McCain an asshole now because he's not going against a Republican? Because from my perspective, that's the only logical reading of what people posted in this thread. McCain's ok when he's the Republican maverick, taking shots at Bush and the GOP's people. But apparently attacking the above reproach Democrats puts him in the wrong.

02-08-2006, 07:19 AM	#22 (permalink)
sailor beauty in the breakdown Location: Chapel Hill, NC	My take is bad information from both parties. No biggie, and nothing to get anyone's panties in a knot over. A misunderstanding, nothing more. __________________ "Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws." --Plato

02-08-2006, 10:47 AM	#24 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Wow... This is really interesting... As <a href="http://www.wonkette.com/politics/john-mccain/maverick-senator-john-mccains-wednesday-anger-list-153562.php">this Wonkette post</a> points out (in typical humorous, over-done Wonkette style), there have been five or six articles in the last couple days about McCain being angry about various things. What's going on here? He's traded on this image as mature, level-headed, and above the fray. Is he trying to butch up his image for a run in 2008?

02-08-2006, 11:00 AM	#25 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	Barak and McCain had an agreement that they would work on a bipartisan corruption reform bill. They agreed to put party posturing aside and do what is right for the senate and the country. The worked on this bill together. McCain had basically a drafted bill in his hand when Obaba, under pressure from harry reid, announced that the democrats had a corruption reform bill and no republicans would be sponsors on it. That is what McCain is pissed off about. He was completely had. __________________ "If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser