Far Lefty loon talk radio host Randi Rhoads jumps the shark……again…….

(Via and a very big H/T to Captain Ed over at HotAir.com)

Here we go again! It seems that the far-lefty loon talk show radio host Randi Rhodes has once again jumped the shark.

On September 8, 2008, Rhodes claimed that Presidential Candidate John McCain received preferential treatment in Vietnam, when he was taken captive.

Now it seems, that she has her eyes on Sarah Palin, something that does not surprise this writer at all, seeing that she divorced her husband. and is suspected of being a closet lesbian.

Now, Rhodes is accusing Sarah Palin of sleeping with teenage boys.

The Video:

The Transcript:

RHODES (HOUR TWO — 47:59): She’s the woman who shows up at the kid’s birthday party and starts opining about everything from politics to lawn care. This is the woman that knows it all. Will shout you down, will get revenge on you. That’s who she is.

She’s friends with all the teenage boys. You have to say no when your kids say, ‘can we sleep over at the Palin’s? No! NO!’

This is the same Randi Rhodes, who is known for her unhinged skits, public spills, obscene rants and wild accusations.

This is the same sweat hog, who was FIRED from Air America for calling Hillary Clinton and Geraldine Ferraro both “Big f******ing whores”. She claims that she quit, after she was suspended, but anyone with the half a brain knows that’s a big fat lie. Not that it matters, but I happen to know personally, that there are those in the Liberal/Progressive community that do not like this woman, at all. I would show you the comments left about her over at Crooks & Liars after her firing from Air America, but they have since been closed. However, I can show you comments from DailyKos, by those who do not like her at all.

It was been said, over at DailyKos and on other progressive and far lefty liberal Blogs that Randi Rhodes is viewed as the far left’s answer to Michelle Malkin and Rush Limbaugh. Although, I would be willing to bet that fans of theirs would take issue with that assessment.

As I have said many, many, many, times over on this Blog. Do you see now why I left that side of the political fence? Ronald Reagan had it absolutely right when he gave that speech in 1964. Man did he ever.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Keith Olbermann’s Special Comment: The Republicans Hijacked 9/11

Finally, Keith Olbermann has his say on a subject that I wrote about a while back.

Transcript: (via MSNBC)

As promised, a Special Comment about our sad anniversary tomorrow.

Or, more correctly, what our sad anniversary tomorrow has been turned into by the presidential administration, and the current Republican candidates for President and Vice President.

This is supposed to be a day of remembrance. Remembrance of the attack, remembrance of the national unity which followed it.

Most important of all, remembrance of the dead.

But 9/11 has become a brand name. A Republican campaign slogan. Propaganda of the lowest form. 9/11 has become 9/11 with a trademark logo.

9/11 (TM) has sustained a president who long ago should have been dismissed, or impeached. It has kept him and his gang of financial and constitutional crooks in office without — literally — any visible means of support.

9/11 (TM) has made possible the greatest sleight-of-hand in our nation’s history.

The political party in office at the time of the attacks, at the local, state and national levels, the party which uniformly ignored the warnings and the presidential administration already through twenty percent of its first term and no longer wet behind the ears, have not only thus far escaped any blame for the malfeasance and criminal neglect that allowed the attacks to occur, but that presidency and that party, have managed to make it seem as if the other political party would be solely and irredeemably responsible for any similar catastrophe in the future.

Thus, Sen. McCain, were you able to accomplish a further inversion of reality at your party’s nominating convention last week.

There was the former Mayor of the City of New York,  the one who took no counter-terrorism measure in his seven years in office between the first attack on the World Trade Center, and the second attack.

Nothing, except to insist, despite all advice and warning, that his Emergency Command Center be moved directly into the World Trade Center.

Yet there was this man, Sir, Rudolph Giuliani, quite succinctly dismissed as “A Noun, a Verb, and 9/11,” and repudiated even by Republican voters,  transformed into the keynote speaker, Sen. McCain at your convention.

And his childish, squealing, braying, Tourette’s-like repetition of 9/11 (TM), was greeted not as conclusive evidence that he is consumed by massive guilt – hard-earned guilt, in fact  but rather as some kind of political tour-de-force, an endorsement of your Vice Presidential nominee, a rookie governor , a facile and slick con artist.

The blind endorsing the bland, to a chorus of 9/11 (TM), 9/11 (TM), 9/11 (TM.)

Your ringing mindless cheer of “We’ve Kept You Safe Since Then.”While nobody asks “doesn’t then count?”

All of this, sadistically disrespecting the dead of New York, and Washington, and Shanksville. Endorsed,  Sen. McCain. Exploited, Sen. McCain. Trademarked, Sen. McCain by you.

And yet of course the exact moment in which Sen. McCain’s Republicans showed the nation exactly how far they have fallen from the Better Angels of Mr. Lincoln’s Nature, came the next night.

The television networks were told that the Convention would pause, early in the evening, when children could still be watching, for a 9/11 Tribute, and they were encouraged to broadcast it.

What we got was not a tribute to the dead of 9/11, nor even a tribute to the responders, or the singularity of purpose we all felt. The Republicans gave us sociological pornography, a virtual snuff film.

Years ago, responsible television networks, to the applause of the nation, and the relief of its mental health authorities, voluntarily stopped showing the most graphic of the images of the World Trade Center, except with the strongest of warnings.

And yet, the Republicans, at their convention, having virtually seized control of the cable news operations, showed the worst of it.

This is all anyone with a conscience can show you of what the Republicans showed you. The actual collapse of the smoking towers.

A fleeting image of what might have been a victim leaping to his death from a thousand feet up. And something new. From this angle, ground-level, perfectly framed, images, of the fireball created when the second plane hit the second tower.

It was terrifying. After all its object was to terrify. Not to commemorate, not to call for unity, not to remember the dead. But to terrify.

To open again the horrible wounds, to brand the skin of this nation with the message — as hateful as the terrorists’ own, that you must vote Republican or this will happen again and you will die.

And just in case that was not enough, to also dishonestly and profanely conflate 9/11 with the 1979 Iran Hostage Crisis, to stoke the flames of paranoia about another Middle Eastern Nation.

This was a 9/11 Tribute. Not to the dead, nor to the unity. But a tribute to how valuable 9/11 has been as a political tool for the Republican Party. 9/11… (TM.)

Sen. McCain, you had promised us a clean campaign. You could be Snow-White the rest of the way, Sir, yet that manipulative videotape from your convention should tar you always in the minds of decent Americans.

And still, as this seventh 9/11 (TM) approaches that, Sir, is not the worst of your contributions to the utter politicizing of a day that should be sacrosanct to all of us.

Hard to believe, but the Senator has done worse with 9/11 and the evil behind it.

We heard it last week in Minnesota, we’ve heard it off and on since January but Senator McCain said it most concisely in June.

“Look,” he said. “I know the area, I’ve been there, I know wars, I know how to win wars, and I know how to improve our capabilities so that we will capture Osama bin Laden — or put it this way, bring him to justice. We will do it. I know how to do it.”

Sen. McCain seems to be quite serious, that he and he alone, not the CIA, nor the U.S. Military, nor the current President  can capture bin Laden.

Thus we must take him at his word, that this is no mere ludicrous campaign boast.

We must assume Sen. McCain truly believes he is capable of doing this, and has been capable of doing this, since last January. “We will capture Osama bin Laden… we will do it. I know how to do it.”

Well then, Senator, you’d better go and do it hadn’t you?

Because, Sir, if a man or woman in this nation, Democrat or Republican, had a clear and effective means o
f capturing or killing Osama bin Laden…

If that person had been advertising his claim, Senator for eight months.

But if that person not only refused to go to responsible authorities in government and advise them of this plan to catch bin Laden, but further announced he would not even begin to enact this secret plan to corral the world’s most hated man until the end of next January.

What would be your description of such an individual, Senator? Charlatan? Do-nothing? Opportunist? Sen. McCain, if you have, if you have had a means of capturing Osama bin Laden, and you do not immediately inform some responsible authority of the full scope of that plan, you are to some degree great or small aiding and abetting Osama bin Laden.

If you could assist in capturing him now, Sen. McCain, but you have chosen not to you, Sir, have helped Osama bin Laden stay free.

Free to inspire and supervise the terrorists. Free to plan or execute attacks here.

You, Sir, are blackmailing some portion of the American electorate into voting for your party, by promising to help in the capture of bin Laden only if you are made president!

I’d rather win an election than catch bin Laden! No more cynical calculation has ever been made in this nation’s history, Sir. If you lose the election, Senator, are you not going to tell the President-Elect?

Are you intending to keep this a secret until the next election and your party’s next nominee? Senator, as you and your Republicans shed your phony, crocodile, opportunistic tears tomorrow on 9/11 TM, in front of the utterly disingenuous banner “Country First,” the fact is, you have shown that it is John McCain first, and the country last.

The fact is, Sir, by holding out on your secret plan to catch bin Laden by searing those images into our collective wounded American psyche at your nomination last week, terrorists are not what you, John McCain, fight. Terrorists are what you, John McCain, use.

Amen and Amen. This is why I will not be voting Republican, ever.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

There's a fine line between reporting the facts and desperation

….and wise is the man, that knows the difference between the two.

Someone needs to tell that to the Washington Post.

The Washington Post reports:

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office,
charging a “per diem” allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business.

The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions. And her husband, Todd,
has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

Asked Monday about the official policy on charging for children’s travel expenses, Garnero said: “We cover the expenses of anyone who’s
conducting state business. I can’t imagine kids could be doing that.”

The problem with that, in the same article it says:

Palin, who earns $125,000 a year, claimed and received $16,951 as her allowance, which officials say was permitted because her
official “duty station” is Juneau, according to an analysis of her travel documents by The Washington Post.

Gubernatorial spokeswoman Sharon Leighow said Monday that Palin’s expenses are not unusual and that, under state policy, the first family
could have claimed per diem expenses for each child taken on official business but has not done so.

“As a matter of protocol, the governor and the first family are expected to attend community events across the state,” she said. “It’s
absolutely reasonable that the first family participates in community events.”

The state finance director, Kim Garnero, said Alaska law exempts the governor’s office from elaborate travel regulations. Said Leighow: “The
governor is entitled to a per diem, and she claims it.”

and about her kids:

Leighow noted that under state policy, all of the governor’s children are entitled to per diem expenses, even her infant son. “The first
family declined the per diem [for] the children,” Leighow said. “The amount that they had declined was $4,461, as of August 5.”

and the money quote:

Gov. Palin has spent far less on her personal travel than her predecessor: $93,000 on airfare in 2007, compared with $463,000 spent
the year before by her predecessor, Frank Murkowski. He traveled often in an executive jet that Palin called an extravagance during her
campaign. She sold it after she was sworn into office.

Now, she didn’t sell it on E-Bay, she sold it through a broker, at a loss no less, but this idiotic stuff, is just that, idiotic. There’s no scandal here. She took the money, because she was entitled to it.

Looks like the MSM is really desperate for a story and they went with this. They’re channeling the New York Times here, and it could come back to haunt them.

Live Blogging Rachel Maddows New show!

This will be an updating post, scroll down for updates…..

My thoughts so far about Rachel Maddow’s Show.

Waaay too much Keith Olbermann. It’s not Keith’s show it’s hers. Please, Keith stay on your own damn show, please. Thank You, I watch countdown, and I don’t want Rachel’s show being Keith lite, thanks.

No theme music, where the hell is the theme music??!?!?!

That transition between Keith’s show and Rachel was gay as hell.

Show is the same format as Keith’s she needs to change it up.

That set, ugh! It looks like Dan Abrams old set, slightly modified. They need to get rid of the Red, White and Blue and come up with something a bit more…. Rachel?

“The Rachel Maddow Show”? It’s too damn generic, they need a name. I have an idea for a name. How about “Straight Talk with Rachel Maddow”? If you know anything about Maddow the name would be ironic.

T.D. Jakes?!?! Ugh. why him? He’s an idiot. (Believe me, I know…)

Rachel publishes her e-mail, Keith does not, go figure.

The show still reminds me of Abrams show, she needs to seriously change the look and the whole theme.

S-CHIP like ice cream?!?! joke bomb…. d’oh!

Finally! Some Theme Music, kinda generic.

Ugh, More Keith?!? Countdown lite? Looks that way…

Pat Buchanan, a good choice, the only well known right winger, who will trash the Republicans! (well, besides me…) 😉 Good pick…

Something tells me, Pat won’t be back on! 😆

I wonder if she’d ever have Michelle Malkin on? heh.

Pop culture at the end? Too damn Keith-like… need to work on that.

Control room didn’t switch to camera, made her look like a buffoon at the end. Nice work guys. 🙄

My final thoughts:

She has a TON of potential, she just needs to give the show more of HER personality and less of Keith’s and MSNBC’s. Other than that, she’s a very talented young lady. I will be watching to see how it changes of the course of the next few weeks.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

MSNBC removes Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews from election coverage

I hate to say this, But I kind of knew this was coming, I just did not know when.

Via The New York Times:

MSNBC tried a bold experiment this year by putting two politically incendiary hosts, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, in the anchor chair to lead the cable news channel’s coverage of the election.

That experiment appears to be over.

After months of accusations of political bias and simmering animosity between MSNBC and its parent network NBC, the channel decided over the weekend that the NBC News correspondent and MSNBC host David Gregory would anchor news coverage of the coming debates and election night. Mr. Olbermann and Mr. Matthews will remain as analysts during the coverage.

The change — which comes in the home stretch of the long election cycle — is a direct result of tensions associated with the channel’s perceived shift to the political left.

“The most disappointing shift is to see the partisan attitude move from prime time into what’s supposed to be straight news programming,” said Davidson Goldin, formerly the editorial director of MSNBC and a co-founder of the reputation management firm DolceGoldin.

Executives at the channel’s parent company, NBC Universal, had high hopes for MSNBC’s coverage of the political conventions. Instead, the coverage frequently descended into on-air squabbles between the anchors, embarrassing some workers at NBC’s news division, and quite possibly alienating viewers. Although MSNBC nearly doubled its total audience compared with the 2004 conventions, its competitive position did not improve, as it remained in last place among the broadcast and cable news networks. In prime time, the channel averaged 2.2 million viewers during the Democratic convention and 1.7 million viewers during the Republican convention.

The success of the Fox News Channel in the past decade along with the growth of political blogs have convinced many media companies that provocative commentary attracts viewers and lures Web browsers more than straight news delivered dispassionately.

“In a rapidly changing media environment, this is the great philosophical debate,” Phil Griffin, the president of MSNBC, said in a telephone interview Saturday. Fighting the ratings game, he added, “the bottom line is that we’re experiencing incredible success.”

But as the past two weeks have shown, that success has a downside. When the vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin lamented media bias during her speech, attendees of the Republican convention loudly chanted “NBC.”

In interviews, 10 current and former staff members said that long-simmering tensions between MSNBC and NBC reached a boiling point during the conventions. “MSNBC is behaving like a heroin addict,” one senior staff member observed. “They’re living from fix to fix and swearing they’ll go into rehab the next week.”

You all most likely were thinking that I was going to terribly upset about this and was going to write a huge raging editorial about it. Well, guess again. I’m fully aware of Matthew’s and Olbermann’s editorial positions. Quite frankly, I am surprised that they even allowed Olbermann on there, during the election coverage. I mean, Chris is left of center, but Olbermann is obviously left wing all the way. I don’t think he’s far left, but far enough to make the Republicans feel uncomfortable with him. Which means he was really doing his job. The problem was, he was doing his job, when he was supposed to be neutral. I will admit, it is hard to choke back an opinion, especially when you’ve got some right wing gas bag, or shall I say, Republican gas bag, running a damn line, and you know he’s full of shit. It’s tough not to speak out.

The reason I like Keith Olbermann, as I said once before, I like Keith Olbermann because he gives a damn about our Constitution. Because it is quite obvious to this Libertarian-leaning, Paleo-Conservative, that Neo-Conservative Bush and Co. have totally trampled all over that damned Constitution. This is why I watched Keith’s show, not because I agreed with all of his Politics, but because I wanted to watch someone who wasn’t trying to kiss king George W. Bush’s ass on the air every night, like they do over on the Rupert Murdoch stooge network.

I’ll be straight and honest with you, I’m a Moderate Libertarian Conservative, but I totally find Joe Scarborough to be just an absolute asshole. I mean, I don’t know how the hell Mika Brzezinski does it. Scarborough is the perfect example of an damn male chauvinistic blowhard. The pay must be damn good for her to sit next to that guy and listen to his idiotic bullshit. This is why I do not watch the network in the mornings.

Anyhow, there’s my take on it.

The reactions are as expected, with the Republican Neo-Conservatives wetting themselves with glee, as usual and the left a bit ticked, but not all of them. and here they are: Hot Air, TalkLeft, Townhall.com, michellemalkin.com, Olbermann Watch, The WIZARD, fkap, First Draft, Little Green Footballs, Founding Bloggers, Liberal Values, The Confluence, Commentary, Patterico’s Pontifications, Dr. Melissa Clouthier, Ace of Spades HQ, TVNewser, NewsBusters.org, MyDD, The Sundries Shack, The Other McCain, The Campaign Spot, Oliver Willis, Macsmind, Wizbang, AMERICAblog News and The Strata-Sphere and more via Memeorandum

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Interesting:Democratic Party Convention flag story Bogus

Remember that Story that I reported on, about Democrats dumping flags? Turns out, it was bogus.

Via the Huffington Post:

UPDATE: DNC spokeswoman Karen Finney issues a statement: “American flags were proudly waved by the 75,000 people who joined Barack Obama at the Democratic Convention. John McCain should applaud that, but instead his supporters wrongfully took leftover bundles of our flags from the stadium to play a cheap political stunt calling into question our patriotism. On the same day he agrees to join Barack Obama at Ground Zero on September 11, John McCain attacks the patriotism of Obama supporters who so proudly waved the American flag at our historic event in Denver just days ago.”

UPDATE II: Another statement from the Democratic National Convention Committee: “Stories circulating about flags at the Democratic National Convention are false. We distributed more than 125,000 American made flags at the Convention – the flags removed from Invesco field were intended for other events and taken without permission. It’s disappointing that someone would take American flags without authorization and then falsely describe how they were being used. We have the utmost respect for the American flag, and it’s sad to see them being used for a cheap political stunt.”

I apologize for even Blogging about this, at all. If, in fact, John McCain’s campaign was responsible for this bogus story getting out, it shows the level of desperation by the campaign to discredit the Democrats in the election.

What levels will Neo-Conservatives stoop to, to win an election!

There’s more, TPM is also reporting:

According to a article just out from Huffington Post, the story about flags from the Democratic National Convention being thrown away is simply false. The story was jumped on and apparently authored by the McCain campaign. But the real tell is down in the Huffpo piece where it traces the story to none other than Fox News’ Carl Cameron.

Longtime readers of TPM will remember that back in October 2004 this site caught Cameron publishing a series of fabricated quotes attributed to John Kerry on the front page of the Fox News website.

After I placed a series of calls to Fox News inquiring about the Kerry story, the story was eventually pulled, and Fox was forced to issue an apology and retract the fabricated story. Fox spokesman Paul Schur told TPM: “Carl [Cameron] made a stupid mistake which he regrets. And he has been reprimanded for his lapse in judgment. It was a poor attempt at humor.”

Why anybody would believe anything this joker says is difficult to fathom. But he’s good enough for McCain.

I should have known Faux Noise would have been in on this whole thing. Not surprising at all. 🙄

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sorry guys, I don't buy it

I happen to be reading over at HotAir.com.

It seems that Ed Morrissey was on the Northern Alliance Radio Network, and some guy, claiming to be a volunteer driver calls in and proceeds to tell them that MSNBC’s coverage was rigged, that MSNBC’s people basically lied about what they said on the air, and that Chris Matthew’s prescreened everyone, before interviewing them.

You can listen to the audio, by going here.

Okay, first of all, were any precautions taken to ensure that this guy was not some sort of crank caller? I highly doubt this.

Second of all, as much as I realize that MSNBC is now a left leaning network, mostly at night, this sort of “bottom of the barrel” type of scraping to find dirt on networks that don’t agree with your political ideologies is, quite frankly, childish and immature.

You think Fox News doesn’t pre-screen people on their network? Please. Don’t make me laugh.

If the Republican Bloggers want to be taken seriously by the rest of America, they need to focus on Blogging about factual issues that matter to people, and get away from this dirty flinging and gossip nonsense. Because when you do this, you become, as far as I am concerned, the Republican version of TMZ.COM.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bob Barr, The Right Choice for America…..

Bob Barr For President 2008

So far, Bob Barr has raised $836, 686, 52.

Join Bob Barr’s effort to retake America. Donate today

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Rachel Maddow, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Reason number 500,865,345,564,000 why I do not watch fox news

Oy!

Via TPM:

Now you see why I refuse to watch Faux Noise. If I sat here and typed why I thought this was wrong, stupid, ect, ect, ect. I’d be here all night, and seeing my body clock is seriously whacked outta shape, and I’m just a very large pile of grumpy, I’ll pass.

But, I think you can fill in the blanks.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Memo to John McCain, Don't be a dickhead, please….

It seems that ol’ Juan McSame is wanting to live up to the image that the Democrats are painting for him. A senile, cantankerous old man.

This little gem, comes Via TIME:

For years, John McCain’s marathon bull sessions with reporters were more than a means of delivering a message; they were
the message. McCain proudly, flagrantly refused direction from handlers, rarely dodged tough questions and considered those who did
wimps and frauds. The style told voters that he was unafraid, that he had nothing to hide and that what you see is what you get. "Anything
you want to talk about," he promised reporters aboard the Straight Talk Express in Iowa back in March 2007. "One of the fundamental principles
of the bus is that there is no such thing as a dumb question." When asked if he would keep the straight talk coming, McCain replied, "You
think I could survive if I didn’t? We’d never be forgiven … I’d have to hire a food taster, somebody to start my car in the morning." Even
after he won the GOP nomination, he demanded that his new campaign plane be configured to include a sofa up front so he could re-create
the Straight Talk Express at 30,000 ft.

However, this has changed quite a bit here as of recent, here’s the transcript of ol’ McSame being a total ass to the media:

And so when TIME’s James Carney and Michael Scherer were invited to the front of McCain’s plane recently for an interview, they were ushered
forward, past the curtain that now separates reporters from the candidate, past the sofa that was designed for his gabfests with the
press and taken straight to the candidate’s seat. McCain at first seemed happy enough to do the interview. But his mood quickly soured.
The McCain on display in the 24-minute interview was prickly, at times abrasive, and determined not to stray off message. An excerpt:

What do you want voters to know coming out of the Republican Convention — about you, about your candidacy?

I’m prepared to be President of the United States, and I’ll put my country first.

There’s a theme that recurs in your books and your speeches, both about putting country first but also about honor. I wonder if you could
define honor for us?

Read it in my books.

I’ve read your books.

No, I’m not going to define it.

But honor in politics?

I defined it in five books. Read my books.

[Your] campaign today is more disciplined, more traditional, more aggressive. From your point of view, why the change?

Iwill do as much as we possibly can do to provide as much access to the press as possible.

But beyond the press, sir, just in terms of …

I think we’re running a fine campaign, and this is where we are.

Do you miss the old way of doing it?

I don’t know what you’re talking about.

Really? Come on, Senator.

I’ll provide as much access as possible …

In 2000, after the primaries, you went back to South Carolina to talk about what you felt was a mistake you had made on the Confederate
flag. Is there anything so far about this campaign that you wish you could take back or you might revisit when it’s over?

[Does not answer.]

Do I know you? [Says with a laugh.]

[Long pause.] I’m very happy with the way our campaign has been conducted, and I am very pleased and humbled to have the nomination of
the Republican Party.

You do acknowledge there was a change in the campaign, in the way you had run the campaign?

[Shakes his head.]

You don’t acknowledge that? O.K., when your aides came to you and you decided, having been attacked by Barack Obama, to run some of those
ads, was there a debate?

The campaign responded as planned.

Jumping around a bit: in your books, you’ve talked about what it was like to go through the Keating Five experience, and you’ve been quoted
as saying it was one of the worst experiences of your life. Someone else quoted you as saying it was even worse than being a POW …

That’s another one of those statements made 17 or 18 years ago which was out of the context of the conversation I was having. Of course the
worst, the toughest experience of my life was being imprisoned, so people can pluck phrases from 17 or 18 years ago …

I wasn’t suggesting it as a negative thing. I was just saying that …

I’m just suggesting it was taken out of context. I understand how comments are taken out of context from time to time. But obviously, the
toughest time of my life, physically and [in] every other way, would be the time that I almost died in prison camp. And I think most Americans
understand that.

How different are you from President Bush? Are you in step with your party? Are you independent from your party?

My record shows that I have put my country first and I follow the philosophy and traditions of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt and
Ronald Reagan. Sometimes that is not in keeping with the present Administration or my colleagues, but I’ve always put my country first,
whether it’s saying I didn’t support the decision to go to Lebanon or my fighting against the corruption in Washington or out-of-control
pork-barrel spending, which has led to members of Congress residing in federal prison. So I’ve always stood up for a set of principles and a
philosophy that I think have been pretty consistent over the years.

Your tougher line on Russia, which predated [the Russian invasion of Georgia], now to many looks prescient. Others say it’s indicative of a
belligerent approach to foreign policy that would perhaps further exacerbate the tensions being created with our allies and others around
the world under the Bush Administration. How do you respond to that critique?

Well, it reminds me of some of the arguments we went through when Ronald Reagan became President of the United States. I think Russian
behavior has been very clear, and I’ve pointed it out for quite a period of time, and the chronicle of their actions has been well known
since President [Vladimir] Putin came to power, and I believe that it’s very important that Russia behave in a manner befitting a very strong
nation. They’re not doing so at this time, so therefore I will criticize and in some cases — in the case of the aggression against
Georgia — condemn them.

You were a very enthusiastic supporter of the invasion of Iraq and, in the early stages, of the Bush Administration’s handling of the war.
Are those judgments you’d like to revisit?

Well, my record is clear. I believe that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein. I believe it’s clear that he had every
intention to acquire and use weapons of mass destruction. I can only imagine what Saddam Hussein would be doing with the wealth he would
acquire with oil at $110 and $120 a barrel. I was one of the first to point out the failure of strategy in Iraq under [former Defense
Secretary Donald] Rumsfeld. I was criticized for being disloyal to the Republicans and the President. I was the first to say I would lose a
campaign rather than lose a war. I supported the surge. No observer  over the last two years would say the surge hasn’t succeeded. I believe
we did the righ
t thing.

A lot of people know about your service from your books, but most people don’t know that you have two sons currently in the military. Can
you describe what it means to have Jack and Jimmy in uniform?

We don’t discuss our sons.

Look McCain, if you want to be President, you’d be learn to deal with the damn media AND Bloggers. Because if you continue this little trend of being a total prick to the main stream media, you might just find yourself beaten in a election, because the way I see it, as an Independent Conservative, I feel that if John McCain cannot handle the media, how is he going to handle Russia, How is he going to handle Iraq? How is he going to handle the daily grind of the day to day operations of the White House?

Of course, I expect that Mr. McSame will again use his P.O.W. status, which McCain and his campaign has been using as a damn crutch, as an excuse to be an grotchity old fool. Sorry, but this Conservative isn’t buying that line of nonsense.

In other words, change the attitude or get the hell out of the Presidential race sir.