the FLIP-FLOPPER's flip-flopping is AMAZING, unlike other politicians he flip-flopping is LEGEND.

how can you flip flop on a particular issue so soon.

timetable
*********

on thursday: how can obama be calling for a timetable

on friday: obama's timetable is a good timetable

on sunday: i never said anything about a timetable

gay adoption
****************

last week: NO gay adoption

last week 2 minutes later: Yes on gay adoption

today: NO gay adoption

mcFlip MAKE UP YOU FLIP-FLOPPING mind.

McCain you better change your slogan "Straight Talk". It doesn't apply to the way you keep on talking!

McCain banked on the freedom fighter strategy to quell the violence (don't kid yourselves the strategy of giving insurgents money and guns and power just like we did with the "freedom fighters in Afghanistan is the only way this surge worked...

problem is now we created a new situation with the "sons of Iraq" that is the same as we had with Reaga's freedom fighters...

those freedomn fighters soon toook over the country under thenname the Taliban...and gave their fellow freedom fighters (Osama Bin Laden and al qaeda) residency in the country.

so for this strategy to work Mccain banked on us occupying for a very long time.

unfortunately he is not an economist and didn't realize what that would mean not only to our resources but the world economic situation.

this man should never be President...he's not smart enough.

First, McCain complained that Barak hadn't been to Iraq and then he complained that he was being ignored by the press...Methinks that he must be regretting both!!

As an 82 year old independent great grandmother who began the primaries on the fence, I observe that once again the Republicanas are outdoing themselves in snide comments. I remember the first time my mother voted for a Democrat for president saying: "The Republicans used to be the party which stood for the good things." Dimly, I remember that, and there have been a few individuals... Noweadays, judging from tactics in recent campaigns and this one they have become "NaRROW AND NASTY" They do seem to outdo the Democrats in lowdown smear tactics, and some p[eople must buy into that lousy stuff! MCcAIN will pounce on Barack if he does or if he doesn't. McCain does not seem to comprehend what Obam is attempting to do, and I am not sure a lot of the public gets it either. Or maybe he just doesn't want to acknowledge it?
As the p[ublic "sort of--almost" elected G. W. Bush twice ( and say, G. W. it was never a mandate!), will the American Public flub it again with another worse mistake at this point in History? Horrors!
Could McCain's criticism of Barack's trip to Europe be somewhat based on jealousy? Is he really a sorehead? Some elements of this seem show through from time to time. Temper., temper, John. I am older than you.
Could John McCain conceiveably attract and hold a crowd of 200,00 with wonderful speechifying? Not on your life! Barack took him up on the tauntings about going to Iraq and quite successfully went all over! It would seem there is a bit of the green-eyed monster in McCain's reaction. Hard to blam the old geezer!

I think mccain thinks we will forget what he says he thinks everyone is focusing on obama we will forget what he said and no one will notice mccain we listen we know your a big FLIP FLOPPER!!!

I am getting the impression that Senator McCain's responses are being taken out of context. Isn't each statement context dependent? It would be helpful to the voters if the entire context of a response by a candidate to a question was included in an article, especially when citing a previous comment.

Instead it seems that some of the comments become content-loaded -- and extrapolations are made by the writer. This appears to be undermining the credibility of the report - not the candidate. I don't perceive Senator McCain as distancing himself from his comment -- I perceive him as providing clarification for the benefit of the voters. The word "distancing" chosen by Ms. Bruce -- does not reflect what really happened. Candidate McCain offered CLARIFICATION: and that is the ethical thing to do. Reporters, please be careful in your selection of your adjectives -- we, the readers appreciate fair and balanced reporting. Ah -- for the good ole days of Walter Cronkite. This candidate is taking a stand on ethics. It's best the reporters take greater care in their word-smithing efforts as a sound bite reduce onto paper appears to me to be the intentional biased of a report. There are enough substantive issues out there that we shouldn't have to winnow through subjective characterizations -- endowing our Presidential Candidates with motivations and intentions that do not exist in reality except under the guise of editorial quality. In other words, let long form content reflect the words of the candidate in context and please don't add content-loaded meanings through your word smithing process. We, the readers, have enough to think about without having to analyze how the intentions and editorial pressures/deadlines of each reporter have influenced the presentation of information as it is posted on line. This election is a big deal...a VERY BIG DEAL. Lead the other reporters by example. Candidate McCain offered "CLARIFICATION" ON A PREVIOUS COMMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF VOTERS -- HE DID NOT "DISTANCE" HIMSELF FROM A PREVIOUS COMMENT (i.e., treat our candidates with respect). McCain treated the reporters with respect by providing clarification on an answer to a previous question.

I am getting the impression that Senator McCain's responses are being taken out of context. Isn't each statement context dependent? It would be helpful to the voters if the entire context of a response by a candidate to a question was included in an article, especially when citing a previous comment.

Instead it seems that some of the comments become content-loaded -- and extrapolations are made by the writer. This appears to be undermining the credibility of the report - not the candidate. I don't perceive Senator McCain as distancing himself from his comment -- I perceive him as providing clarification for the benefit of the voters. The word "distancing" chosen by Ms. Bruce -- does not reflect what really happened. Candidate McCain offered CLARIFICATION: and that is the ethical thing to do. Reporters, please be careful in your selection of your adjectives -- we, the readers appreciate fair and balanced reporting. Ah -- for the good ole days of Walter Cronkite. This candidate is taking a stand on ethics. It's best the reporters take greater care in their word-smithing efforts as a sound bite reduced onto paper appears to me to be the intentional biasing of a report. There are enough substantive issues out there that we shouldn't have to winnow through subjective characterizations -- endowing our Presidential Candidates with motivations and intentions that do not exist in reality except under the guise of editorial quality. In other words, let long form content reflect the words of the candidate in context and please don't add content-loaded meanings through your word-smithing process. We, the readers, have enough to think about without having to analyze how the intentions and editorial pressures/deadlines of each reporter have influenced the presentation of information as it is posted on line. This election is a big deal...a VERY BIG DEAL. Lead the other reporters by example. Candidate McCain offered "CLARIFICATION" ON A PREVIOUS COMMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF VOTERS -- HE DID NOT "DISTANCE" HIMSELF FROM A PREVIOUS COMMENT (i.e., treat our candidates with respect). McCain treated the reporters with respect by providing clarification on an answer to a previous question.

I am getting the impression that Senator McCain's responses are being taken out of context. Isn't each statement context dependent? It would be helpful to the voters if the entire context of a response by a candidate to a question was included in an article, especially when citing a previous comment.

Instead it seems that some of the comments become content-loaded -- and extrapolations are made by the writer. This appears to be undermining the credibility of the report - not the candidate. I don't perceive Senator McCain as "backing away" from his comment -- I perceive him as providing clarification for the benefit of the voters. The words "BACKS AWAY" chosen by Ms. Bruce -- do not reflect what really happened. Candidate McCain offered CLARIFICATION: and that is the ethical thing to do. Reporters, please be careful in your selection of your adjectives -- we, the readers appreciate fair and balanced reporting. Ah -- for the good ole days of Walter Cronkite. This candidate is taking a stand on ethics. It's best the reporters take greater care in their word-smithing efforts as a sound bite reduced onto paper appears to me to be the intentional biasing of a report by the person who wrote the headline. There are enough substantive issues out there that we shouldn't have to winnow through subjective characterizations -- endowing our Presidential Candidates with motivations and intentions that do not exist in reality except under the guise of editorial quality. In other words, let long form content reflect the words of the candidate in context and please don't add content-loaded meanings through your word-smithing process. We, the readers, have enough to think about without having to analyze how the intentions and editorial pressures/deadlines of each reporter have influenced the presentation of information as it is posted on line. This election is a big deal...a VERY BIG DEAL. Lead the other reporters by example. Candidate McCain offered "CLARIFICATION" ON A PREVIOUS COMMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF VOTERS -- HE DID NOT "BACK AWAy" FROM A PREVIOUS COMMENT (i.e., treat our candidates with respect). McCain treated the reporters with respect by providing clarification on an answer to a previous question.

I am getting the impression that Senator McCain's responses are being taken out of context. Isn't each statement context dependent? It would be helpful to the voters if the entire context of a response by a candidate to a question was included in an article, especially when citing a previous comment.

Instead it seems that some of the comments become content-loaded -- and extrapolations are made by the writer. This appears to be undermining the credibility of the report - not the candidate. I don't perceive Senator McCain as "backing away" from his comment -- I perceive him as providing clarification for the benefit of the voters. The words "BACKS AWAY" chosen by Ms. Bruce -- do not reflect what really happened. Candidate McCain offered CLARIFICATION: and that is the ethical thing to do. Reporters, please be careful in your selection of your adjectives -- we, the readers appreciate fair and balanced reporting. Ah -- for the good ole days of Walter Cronkite. This candidate is taking a stand on ethics. It's best the reporters take greater care in their word-smithing efforts as a sound bite reduced onto paper appears to me to be the intentional biasing of a report by the person who wrote the headline. There are enough substantive issues out there that we shouldn't have to winnow through subjective characterizations -- endowing our Presidential Candidates with motivations and intentions that do not exist in reality except under the guise of editorial quality. In other words, let long form content reflect the words of the candidate in context and please don't add content-loaded meanings through your word-smithing process. We, the readers, have enough to think about without having to analyze how the intentions and editorial pressures/deadlines of each reporter have influenced the presentation of information as it is posted on line. This election is a big deal...a VERY BIG DEAL. Lead the other reporters by example. Candidate McCain offered "CLARIFICATION" ON A PREVIOUS COMMENT FOR THE BENEFIT OF VOTERS -- HE DID NOT "BACK AWAy" FROM A PREVIOUS COMMENT (i.e., treat our candidates with respect). McCain treated the reporters with respect by providing clarification on an answer to a previous question.

TO: ANGRY AFRICAN

I couldn't resist and did check out your bog...oops,....blog. So you are an African and living here now. That's interesting....do you happen to be a citizen?...that's what most of us call ourselves here....and furthermore, if you don't like it here, you can always go back to Africa....probably be happier there helping to straighten out that continent. If you are doing your homework for your bog....oops...blog, you probably have found that the U.S. election is tightening....some folks for "flip-flop" McCain, and some folks gor "flop-flop" Obama.

McCain please don't bring your war mentality 40 years ago to the 21st century. American people recognize your sacrifice. Maybe you look better as prisoner of war instead to lead the country!

Can we really rely on this old crank who can't make up his mind?

Looks like Cindy McCain forgot to give her husband his cough syrup.

Is it only me, but when John McCain smiles, he reminds me of Howdy Doody ... worst yet, he act just like the aged-tv puppet.

LOL - you are so worked up defending him that you wrote a comment that rivals the article in length and had to post it 3x.

If this is what it takes to explain what McCain said - I don't have time....

Context-Dependent: As most of McCain's attacks are based on one lines or grossly exaggerated or outright inaccurate ads, I too wish that all comments are context related.

However, watching McCain on both CNN and ABC today, most of McCain's comments are worse when the whole context is included.

DEVIOUSNESS AT WORK

CONTEXT-DEPENDENT said:
"I am getting the impression that Senator McCain's responses are being taken out of context."

McCain followed his statement saying timetables have to be based on conditions on the ground, and even stressed the point in the same reply to Blitzer. Here is his reply:

"He said it's a pretty good timetable based on conditions on the ground. I think it's a pretty good timetable, as we should -- or horizons for withdrawal. But they have to be based on conditions on the ground. This success is very fragile. It's incredibly impressive, but very fragile. So we know, those of us who have been involved in it for many years, know that if we reverse this, by setting a date for withdrawal, all of the hard-won victory can be reversed."

http://rss.usatoday.mlogic3g.com/detail.jsp?key=875679&rc=ne

Using comments out of text is fairly typical behavior for Obama supporters.

Another case of BHO telling the voters what they want to hear in order to get elected. His trip really did not add anything to his ability. Perhaps McCain can provide him a position in the middle east to improve his knowledge.

No matter if McCain flips, flubs, or lies, the Media will not cover it.
Only Obama gets any scrutiny, which is why the polls are so close.
You have the 30% sheep factor, with the GOP - - they'll just repeat, & believe everything they are told.
So, all McCain needs is a collection of 15-20% racists, uninformed, extremely wealthy, or dislike Obama's policies... for McCain to win.
The Media's working on it for McCain, unless they start scrutinizing him.
You want to disagree with Obama, cool, but all this he's dumb, an empty suit, the messiah, etc... it's rather amazing, the ignorance from the right. It's like these people's brains, have vaporized from lack of use.

As usual, McCain contradicts himself AGAIN!! Is that man operating under mental disabilities?? Read where McCain recent ad criticizing Senator Obama for not visiting the troops shows Senator Obama playing basketball with our troops in Kuwait, then saying Obama had time to play basketball (remember, in Kuwait) but did not have time to visit to visit our troops in Germany. McCain is distorting these two situations and making it look and sound like Senator Obama was playing basketball IN GERMANY instead of visiting the troops IN GERMANY! McCain is an evil man who keeps slandering Senator Obama in an effort to make himself look good. McCain, I know you think America's citizens are whiners and that we suffer from mental recession, you tried to make us suffer from "psychologial(mental) oildrillling complacency and tried to trick us into beleiving oildrilling NOW would provide immediate relief at the pumps, when in fact we would not see one drop for 7-10 years!! McCain, please stop playing mind games with us....we are bright, smart and intelligent people and we see CLEARLY what you are doing to get to the White House. Slander, lies, and false accusations will get you to hell, but doubt it will get you to the Oval Office!!