Presidential politics

McCain jealous of Obama?

Instead of speaking to a wide range of subjects, John McCain’s campaign ads have been reduced to a one-trick pony. They continue to churn out childish, churlish chicanery, chiding and poking fun at Barack Obama’s ideas and personal appeal. And McCain actually approves these pathetic ads. It smacks of jealousy to me.

It is indeed ironic that McCain now agrees with Obama’s ideas — proper tire pressure and engine tune-ups — to cut our demand for gasoline, as do the Energy Department and NASCAR.

By the way, anyone need a free air pressure gauge? (What a costly boo-boo that was.)

Delores Mair
Kansas City

McCain needs Rice for VP

John McCain is behind in the polls. To remain competitive he should choose Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for vice president. It would help him with women and minorities. And judging from some statements she has made, she would be a good president should the need arise.

Statement of fact: McCain is not the best major candidate. Bob Barr, the Libertarian, is.

Tom Halvorsen
Joplin, Mo.

Obama will lose: Here’s why

Here are three predictions:

1. Barack Obama will lose the presidential election

2. Great howls of racism will rise to the nation’s rooftops.

3. The truth — that the more they heard, the more a majority of the American electorate came to realize candidate Obama was all meringue and no pie — will be lost in the uproar.

James W. Henry
Lee’s Summit

Comments

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

Jim - Lower prices will drive up demand. basic economics. Volume drives unit cost.
What we need is more supply and lower demand. Unfortunately so many fail to realize there are a plethroa of other petro based prodcust that are consumed in masses not just gasoline. So the focus on strictly blaming SUVs is bogus.

[Jim]

Eng,

Your comment makes no sense. Indeed, your side is saying it's "winter in a month" by insisting that the war only goes back to January of 2007. It's a very good indicator that you know that history is not going to be kind to the folks who took us to war in the first place, McCain being one of them.

McCain seems to want to have it both ways. We're told that the decision to go to war in the first place is a matter for historians to debate, but that the "surge" is a matter for the voters to consider. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The war isn't the "surge," it's everything. It's the run-up, it's the WMD claims, it's the fear-mongering, it's the conduct of the war pre-surge, it's everything.

McCain was wrong about Iraq from the beginning, and he's wrong now when he insists we stay for decades. The Iraqis have let us know they want us gone on a timetable that is very similar to Obama's. Their democratically elected president has said that Obama's timetable is the right idea, and has rebuffed any attempt to build permanent bases for a long-term American presence.

Bush has finally come around to Obama's common-sense position, and McCain is left trying to argue for a policy no one wants (except for the neocon dead-enders like yourself).

[Engineer]

Jim
Now is now, after the surge has worked, not months ago when Obama was saying it couldn't possibly work and we should withdraw in 16 months. If you say on June 1 that it will be winter in a month, and keep saying it each day, sooner or later you will be right.

[CRD]

Good posts, Jim.

[kcstar_is_one_sided]

"I'll take no lectures from someone who repeatedly embarrasses himself on here."

That's funny coming from you.

[Jim]

So I wonder what McCain does now that the Bush Administration has signed onto surrend...er, I mean a timetable for withdrawl from Iraq that looks remarkably similar to Obama's?

Since Bush has now thrown McCain under the bus and signed onto another deal that meets the Iraqis' demands that all US forces leave Iraq by the end of 2011, McCain is going to have to either praise the deal and admit he was wrong, or go back to insisting on an indefinite US troop presence in Iraq.

Perhaps he'll just deflect all the questions by reminding us all he was a POW for the 400th time this week, and expect us all to go away.

[Jim]

Perhaps you should take your own advice, KC Star. I'll take no lectures from someone who repeatedly embarrasses himself on here.

[kcstar_is_one_sided]

You sometimes got to learn just not to say anything Jim. You can't justify a stupid comment, even if the wonder boy said it.

[Jim]

Marctnts,

I'm not saying he's right about it. I'm saying he didn't just make it up. It's been discussed. That was my point. The expert quoted in the article does say it's feasible, but with a lot of caveats.

[Marctnts]

"As far as the saving as much oil as we could get offshore, there is a basis for this. He didn't just make it up. ABC took a look at this and found an expert that says it's feasible"

From what I've read, it's not feasable to to believe that checking your tires and getting a tune-up would offset production amounts from offshore drilling. Heck, even your linked article (if you read all the way to the bottom) comes up with this conclusion. Nice try, but this one is a no-go.

[Jim]

Gary,

I'm glad you recognize that recommending proper tire pressure as a way to increase fuel economy is common sense. Many of your Republican friends have lied about this and said it wouldn't make a difference. They've even said it's Obama's entire energy plan (Kate: "That's not a plan, it's a gimmick")

In reality, the tire pressure thing isn't even part of Obama's energy policy, it's just a common sense recommendation he made that has been backed up by the Department of Energy, NASCAR, AAA, and surprisingly, John McCain. Obama never said it was a solution to the entire energy question.

As far as the saving as much oil as we could get offshore, there is a basis for this. He didn't just make it up. ABC took a look at this and found an expert that says it's feasible:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/07/from-the-fact-1.html

The thing that leaps out at me about this is that we're constantly being told that Obama wants the government getting involved in everyone's lives and doing everything for them. That's a lie, of course. But here we have a great example of Obama telling people what they can do for themselves to save on gas now, and he gets attacked for it.

Meanwhile, McCain has his panderfest with his ludicrous "gas tax holiday," and idea that defies basic economics and says that driving up demand will somehow lower costs. It'll also deprive us of much-needed highway funds, cost jobs and drive up the price. It's a horrible idea no one ever calls him on.

[Gary]

Another day, another round of liberals' glossing over Obama's goofy statements. Obama did not simply say that proper tire pressure and regular tune-ups would increase gas mileage. That would have been obvious but unassailable. He said that the nation could save as much oil by those means as we could produce by offshore drilling. That is ludicrous, and he was rightly lampooned for saying it.

[NoMoreMrNiceGuy]

I think it's the other way around, Obama and his followers jealous of anyone that has any success,except for rappers, pro-athletes, and Hollywierdos.
Sorry, Obamma is not an energy or economics guru, he is simply a Harvard lawyer, he knows how to weasel people. he shold make the perfect politician. The standard maintenance and safety he says he thought of is nothing new. What about the price of coffee, it has gone through the roof from 5 years ago, who is going to go after the greedy coffe bean companies.

[Rogue]

OMG its true! Listen I checked my tire pressure the other day and the price of gas started dropping. OMG, OMG, thank you Messiah, thank you!

What a bunch of moon bats, always good to start your day with a laugh...

Go Yomamm, Go!

[Tracee]

hmmm, rather have a lot of merengue than a DOLT.
MCSAME=BUSH=NO WAY!

[jack]

Does it make a claim true because you buy a lot of TV time making it?