Google
 
Web Osi Speaks!

Monday, July 30, 2012

JOHN MCCAIN DEFENDS HIS PICK OF SARAH PALIN, MAKES IT CLEAR HE ALSO DISAGREED WITH DICK CHENEY OVER USE OF TORTURE. OUCH! THOSE TWO ARE "TORTURING" US.

McCain defends Palin selection following Cheney criticism

Revisiting the last presidential race, Sen. John McCain defended his 2008 selection of Sarah Palin as his running mate after former Vice President Dick Cheney called the decision a "mistake."

The 2008 Republican presidential nominee, asked Monday about Cheney's comments, told Fox News that "everybody has their own views" and said he remains "proud" of the 2008 team's performance.

"I'm always glad to get comments four years later," McCain said, with a hint of mild sarcasm. "Look, I respect the vice president. He and I had strong disagreements as to whether we should torture people or not. I don't think we should have. But the fact is that I'm proud of Sarah Palin, I'm proud of the job she did, I'm proud of the job she continues to do."

Cheney addressed the 2008 vice presidential nominee selection in an interview over the weekend with ABC News.

"I like Governor Palin. I've met her, I know her. She's an attractive candidate. But based on her background she'd only been governor for what, two years. I don't think she passed that test ... of being ready to take over, and I think that was a mistake," he said.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/30/mccain-defends-palin-selection-following-cheney-criticism/#ixzz2276bAe1h

Labels: , ,

Former Vice President, Dick Cheney On The Importance Of Picking A Vice Presidential Candidate: John Mccain Picking Of Sarah Palin Was A "Mistake"! OUCH!! I Know. That Was Why John Mccain Lost My Support And Vote. Watch Video.

Monday, August 03, 2009

Running For Re-Election, "Maverick" John McCain Does The Political Thing -- Will Vote Against Judge Sonia Sotomayor.


Read more here.

Where's the Maverick?

Labels: , ,

Monday, July 13, 2009

SILLY Sarah Failin' (Palin) Resigns, John McCain Applauds. View News Video.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

John McCain Is NOT Sold On SILLY Sarah Failin'. Watch Video.

Wednesday, March 04, 2009

Is The Maverick John McCain Back? Inquiring Minds Want To Know. Watch Video.




Before you answer, watch this, too:

Labels: , ,

Monday, December 15, 2008

Read & Watch Why I STILL Love John McCain. Had He NOT Picked SILLY Sarah Failin', Remained A Maverick & Shunned Bush, He Might Have Become POTUS!

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

"McCain Rebuffed, Obama Vindicated By Court's Guantanamo Ruling".

McCain rebuffed, Obama vindicated by court's Guantanamo ruling
Margaret Talev

WASHINGTON — Thursday's Supreme Court ruling that Guantanamo detainees have a constitutional right to challenge their status in U.S. civilian courts is a blow to Republican presidential candidate John McCain and a vindication for Democratic candidate Barack Obama.

That was underscored by the rivals' reactions to the 5-4 opinion.

"It obviously concerns me," McCain said.

Obama applauded the ruling, saying it was a repudiation of "yet another failed policy supported by John McCain."

Although both senators have opposed the use of torture in military interrogations of detainees and advocated closing the Guantanamo Bay facility, they've taken different stances when it comes to detainees' legal rights.

McCain, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam who survived torture, helped shape the Military Commissions Act of 2006. It established a military-commission trial system as an alternative to civilian courts and said that federal courts couldn't consider habeas corpus petitions of detainees at Guantanamo; that is, detainees couldn't challenge in U.S. civilian courts the grounds on which they were being held.

McCain voted for it and Obama voted against it.

The high court struck down that legislation Thursday.

One of Obama's campaign-speech lines has been that if he's elected president, "I will restore habeas corpus" to detainees.

Obama, who has a law degree and taught constitutional law, said Thursday's opinion undercut President Bush's views on executive power, raised questions about McCain's judgment and was "an important step toward re-establishing our credibility as a nation committed to the rule of law, and rejecting a false choice between fighting terrorism and respecting habeas corpus."

"Our courts have employed habeas corpus with rigor and fairness for more than two centuries, and we must continue to do so as we defend the freedom that violent extremists seek to destroy," he said.

McCain commented briefly on the subject at a news conference in Boston, saying he'd just learned of the opinion and hadn't yet read it, but that "it obviously concerns me. These are unlawful combatants. They are not American citizens."

He said that Chief Justice John G. Roberts' dissent was worthy of attention, but that nevertheless the majority opinion was "a decision the Supreme Court has made" and that "now we have to move forward."

Neither candidate elaborated immediately on what he thought should happen next with detainees at Guantanamo or those at legally murkier U.S. facilities in Afghanistan and elsewhere, or what he sees as the role of the next president in shaping those decisions.

John Hutson, the president and dean of the Franklin Pierce Law Center in New Hampshire and a former Navy rear admiral and judge advocate general who testifies before Congress on detainee issues, said it could be a big issue for Bush's successor.

"If they (detainees) get into court and it's found there is no legitimate evidence, then we're going to have to release them, I think," he said. "It's implicit in the concept of habeas corpus; you can't just hold them indefinitely. I think that is the necessary extension of it. Now they're really going to have to figure out what to do with them."

Labels: ,

Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Pundits, Including Karl Rove, Predict A Barack Obama "BLOWOUT" Of John McCain. Both Gentlemen DESERVE What They Get! AMEN!!

Read more, and watch video.

Now we have to get rid of SILLY Sarah Failin' In Alaska.

Any Republican ready to take on her?

Labels: , , ,

Sunday, November 02, 2008

John McCain Retaliates, HITS Barack Obama With Rev. Wright Ad. OK, It Was The Republican Trust Org. Which Did, But Is The Ad NOT Old STALE News NOW?

John McCalin (And SILLY SARAH PALIN) And Cindy McCain Reveal Themselves.

Thursday, October 30, 2008

SILLY SARAH Palin Is John McCain's "WHACK JOB". Who Called Her That, You Ask? A John McCain Adviser, And I AGREE. Read More From Politico.Com.


Here's the link from Politico, and below's an excerpt:
John McCain's campaign is looking for a scapegoat. It is looking for someone to blame if McCain loses on Tuesday.

And it has decided on Sarah Palin.

In recent days, a McCain “adviser” told Dana Bash of CNN: “She is a diva. She takes no advice from anyone.”

Imagine not taking advice from the geniuses at the McCain campaign. What could Palin be thinking?

Also, a “top McCain adviser” told Mike Allen of Politico that Palin is “a whack job.”

Maybe she is. But who chose to put this “whack job” on the ticket? Wasn’t it John McCain? And wasn’t it his first presidential-level decision?

And if you are a 72-year-old presidential candidate, wouldn’t you expect that your running mate’s fitness for high office would come under a little extra scrutiny? And, therefore, wouldn’t you make your selection with care? (To say nothing about caring about the future of the nation?)

McCain didn’t seem to care that much. McCain admitted recently on national TV that he “didn’t know her well at all” before he chose Palin.

But why not? Why didn’t he get to know her better before he made his choice?

It’s not like he was rushed. McCain wrapped up the Republican nomination in early March. He didn’t announce his choice for a running mate until late August.

Wasn’t that enough time for McCain to get to know Palin? Wasn’t that enough time for his crackerjack “vetters” to investigate Palin’s strengths and weaknesses, check through records and published accounts, talk to a few people, and learn that she was not only a diva but a whack job diva?

But McCain picked her anyway. He wanted to close the “enthusiasm gap” between himself and Barack Obama. He wanted to inject a little adrenaline into the Republican National Convention. He wanted to goose up the Republican base.

And so he chose Palin. Is she really a diva and a whack job? Could be. There are quite a few in politics. (And a few in journalism, too, though in journalism they are called “columnists.”)

As proof that she is, McCain aides now say Palin is “going rogue” and straying from their script. Wow. What a condemnation. McCain sticks to the script. How well is he doing?

In truth, Palin’s real problem is not her personality or whether she takes orders well. Her real problem is that neither she nor McCain can make a credible case that Palin is ready to assume the presidency should she need to.

And that undercuts McCain’s entire campaign.

This was the deal McCain made with the devil. In exchange for energizing his base by picking Palin, he surrendered his chief selling point: that he was better prepared to run the nation in time of crisis, whether it be economic, an attack by terrorists or, as he has been talking about in recent days, fending off a nuclear war.

“The next president won’t have time to get used to the office,” McCain told a crowd in Miami on Wednesday. “I’ve been tested, my friends, I’ve been tested.”

But has Sarah Palin?

I don’t believe running mates win or lose elections, though some believe they can be a drag on the ticket. Lee Atwater, who was George H.W. Bush’s campaign manager in 1988, told me that Dan Quayle cost the ticket 2 to 3 percentage points. But Bush won the election by 7.8 percentage points.

So, in Atwater’s opinion, Bush survived his bad choice by winning the election on his own.

McCain could do the same thing. But his campaign’s bad decisions have not stopped with Sarah Palin. It has made a series of questionable calls, including making Joe the Plumber the embodiment of the campaign.

Are voters really expected to warmly embrace an (unlicensed) plumber who owes back taxes and complains about the possibility of making a quarter million dollars a year?


And did McCain’s aides really believe so little in John McCain’s own likability that they thought Joe the Plumber would be more likable?

Apparently so. Which is sad.

We in the press make too much of running mates and staff and talking points and all the rest of the hubbub that accompanies a campaign.

In the end, it comes down to two candidates slugging it out.

Either McCain pulls off a victory in the last round or he doesn’t.

And if he doesn’t, he has nobody to blame but himself.

Editor's comment: WHACK JOB, indeed.

Labels: ,

What An Embarrassment. At Rally, John McCain Calls For "FAKE" Plumber Joe And Joe Did NOT Show. Even "Joe The Plumber" Is Abandoning John McCain.

Monday, October 27, 2008

"How Would Obama Or McCain Govern As president?"

How would Obama or McCain govern as president?
By Steven Thomma

WASHINGTON — Americans will know in a little more than a week who'll be the country's 44th president, but despite all the promises and the campaign bluster, they won't know until Jan. 20 and beyond how Barack Obama or John McCain would govern.

A landslide win for Obama, now suggested by the polls, could sweep more Democrats into Congress and give him a relatively free hand to change course at home and abroad on issues from taxes to Iraq.

A sinking economy, however, could force Obama to shift priorities, perhaps even delaying his promised tax increase on the wealthy or his expansion of health care to the uninsured. A resurgence of violence in Iraq could compel him to rethink his plan to withdraw U.S. troops.

On the other side of the crystal ball, a narrow win for McCain, the best possible outcome for him now suggested by polls, would set him up for a titanic fight with a Congress that seems sure to remain in Democratic hands.

McCain has a history of working with Democrats in Congress, but they'd be none too happy about watching the presidency slip from their grasp. It's all but impossible, for example, to see how McCain could get them to ratify his proposal to extend President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.

"He has very poor prospects," said George Edwards, a scholar of the presidency and a political scientist at Texas A&M University. "The Democrats would be extremely shocked and irritated if he won. His notions of tax cuts are likely to not go anywhere. His approach to health care probably would not be the one the Democrats would pick up on."

Ironically, though, McCain might be able to strike a bargain with congressional Democrats to extend the expiring tax cuts for those who make less than $200,000 a year, much as Obama wants to do.

A President McCain, like all presidents, would have more leeway on foreign policy than he would on domestic matters. Even there, however, he'd find Congress fighting him at every step and appropriations bill.

"After eight years of the Bush administration, there is an awful lot of animus on Capitol Hill toward the Republican agenda," said former Rep. Tim Penny of Minnesota, a Democrat who's turned independent and supports McCain. "It would be a tricky situation for McCain."

While either candidate could still win, polls this week pointed toward a big win for Obama, who now leads in every state that Democrat John Kerry carried four years ago and in many states that Bush won, including Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio and Virginia.

"If these numbers hold up, he could win the biggest Democratic landslide since Lyndon Johnson in 1964," said Peter Brown, the assistant director of the Polling Institute at Quinnipiac University.

Independent analysts such as Charles Cook of the Cook Political Report and Larry Sabato of the University of Virginia say the Democrats also could win a filibuster-proof 60 seats in the Senate and add as many as 30 seats to their majority in the House of Representatives.

What would that mean? If you like Obama, it means that you could be very happy. If you don't like him, you could be very scared.

"If he wins big, there will be some sense of a mandate. And if he's got a lot of Democrats in Congress, they would be inclined to go along with him," Edwards said.

Domestically, Obama's biggest push could be to overhaul the tax code, cutting taxes for individuals who make less than $200,000 a year and raising them on those who make more than $250,000.

Though the government's deficits are likely to soar thanks to the $700 billion upfront cost of the financial system bailout and probable recession-driven drops in tax revenues, Obama says the tax cuts are needed even more now as an economic stimulus.

Whether he can push through the tax increases on the wealthy, as many Democrats want to do, is another question, however.

When ABC's George Stephanopoulos pressed him on whether he'd push the tax increases if the economy were in recession early next year, Obama said, "No, no, no, no, no. . . . I think we've got to take a look and see where the economy is. . . . We're going to have to re-evaluate at the beginning of the year to see what kind of hole we're in."

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, also said that concerns about the deficit should take a back seat to using government spending or tax cuts to stimulate the economy. Tax increases on the wealthy can come "later on," he said. "There are a lot of very rich people out there whom we can tax at a point down the road and recover some of this money."

Yet if Obama put off tapping that source of revenue, it would rob the government of the money he says he'd use to expand health care for the uninsured.

Obama's vow to pay for all his new programs could suffer another blow — or force another look at priorities — if he can't withdraw troops from Iraq and use that $10 billion a month elsewhere.

Across the changing chessboard, keeping one big promise could require breaking another.

In style as well, Obama could find himself at odds with congressional Democrats or his broader constituency for change.

That happened to Democrats Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, though both were more conservative than the congressional wing of their party, while Obama is at home with the liberal wing of the party that dominates on Capitol Hill.

"The challenge for Obama is how he can manage Congress," former representative Penny said. "Maybe he has that ability. But it's a big unknown. He's so new and has such a skinny legislative record."

One key test: If Obama could muster enough Democratic votes to pass legislation, would he still reach out for Republican votes, too?

"There's a lot of pent-up emotion and legislation waiting on Capitol Hill," Penny said. "If Obama allows the Democratic majorities on the Hill to set the agenda and call the shots, I think he could find himself disappointing a lot of voters who are looking to him to be a more conciliatory, bipartisan leader."

Neither party probably could get everything it wanted. Republicans likely could block Obama's plan of "refundable" tax credits to the working poor that would show up as checks; Democrats could block McCain's extension of tax reductions for the wealthy.

Labels: , , ,

Thursday, October 23, 2008

Sarah Palin: John McCain's PAIN. Watch News Video From Reuters.

Talking About Sarah Palin, Moveon.org "Moves On Her". Watch The Ad. It Is Funny.


Are you laughing yet?

Labels: ,

"Sarah Palin NOT Ready To Be President". Says Who You Ask? Her Supporter. Watch.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

"SILLY" Sarah Palin Says Vice President "Is In Charge Of The Senate". That Is News To Our Founding Fathers. Watch And Laugh.



Are you wondering if she is right?

Well, wonder NO more.

Below is what the U. S. Constitution (Article 1, Section 3) says about the role of the Vice President:

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

So much for the Vice President being in charge of the Senate.

SILLY SARAH continues to embarrass.

Labels: ,

Thursday, October 16, 2008

Palin's Orwellian World.

Palin's Orwellian world

Sarah Palin's reaction to the Legislature's Troopergate report is an embarrassment to Alaskans and the nation.

She claims the report "vindicates" her. She said that the investigation found "no unlawful or unethical activity on my part."

Her response is either astoundingly ignorant or downright Orwellian.

Page 8, Finding Number One of the report says: "I find that Governor Sarah Palin abused her power by violating Alaska Statute 39.52.110(a) of the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act."

In plain English, she did something "unlawful." She broke the state ethics law.

Perhaps Palin has been too busy to actually read the Troopergate report. Perhaps she is relying on briefings from McCain campaign spinmeisters.

That's the charitable interpretation. Because if she had actually read it, she couldn't claim "vindication" with a straight face.

Palin asserted that the report found that "there was no abuse of authority at all in trying to get Officer Wooten fired."

In fact, the report concluded that "impermissible pressure was placed on several subordinates in order to advance a personal agenda, to wit: to get Trooper Michael Wooten fired."

Palin's response is the kind of political "big lie" that George Orwell warned against. War is peace. Black is white. Up is down.

Palin and her camp trumpeted the report's second finding: that she was within her legal authority to fire Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. But the report also said it's likely one of the reasons she fired him was his failure to get rid of her ex-brother-in-law trooper.

That's not "vindication," and surely Palin knows it.

Has Palin committed an impeachable offense? Hardly.

Is what she did indictable? No.

But it wasn't appropriate, especially for someone elected as an ethical reformer. And her Orwellian claims of "vindication" make this blemish on her record look even worse.

anchorage daily news

Labels: ,

Did You Miss The Presidential Debate? Well, Watch It Now.



Oh, BTW, if you wonder who Joe Plumber is, Watch below:

Labels: , , ,