Cafferty poses the question, if Bill Clinton is campaigning for Barack Obama during this final leg to the election, why doesn’t President Bush campaign for John McCain? The responses he reads from his blog are hysterical. The most memorable one referred to Sarah Palin as “Anchorage Annie.”
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
: 
"Integrity is the lifeblood of democracy. Deceit is a poison in its veins."Integrity:
Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Source:Brookings Institution, April 5, 2004.
“People like elected officials with guts who say what they mean... I stand by what I said, I didn’t violate any House rules. I didn’t do anything inappropriate. I’m not under any pressure at all.”Deceit:
Rep Alan Grayson (D-FL) during a press interview on September 30, 2009
“If the public option plan is in there, as a matter of conscience, I will not allow this bill to come to a final vote because I believe debt can break America and send us into a recession that’s worse than the one we’re fighting our way out of today. I don’t want to do that to our children and grandchildren.”
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to FOX News Sunday host Chris Wallace, November 9, 2009.
Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pressrow by Chris Pearson.
35 Comments
October 30, 2008 at 9:44 am
Thank you Lady Freedom for posting this.I can’t stand to watch CNN and wait for Cafferty to come on…..He’s the only one I like over there and never been able to nail down his time slot’s…..Blessings
October 30, 2008 at 10:20 am
This one cracked me up witch1. I died laughing when he posed the question on his blog.
I’m not sure when he comes on either. I wait for the youtube video to come out and watch him that way.
October 30, 2008 at 10:35 am
video no longer available
October 30, 2008 at 10:53 am
It works now.
October 30, 2008 at 12:45 pm
EV, it was probably because it is getting so many hits. Thanks for letting me know…
October 30, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Why is Bush campaigning for McCain?
This is why. Or more precisely, one minute and fifty-five seconds into this clip is why.
October 30, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Grrr, that first line was obviously supposed to read “Why ISN’T Bush Campaigning for McCain”.
October 30, 2008 at 8:04 pm
Bush show support for McCain… That would be the kiss of death. McCain is not Bush and belive it or not if he wins there will not be 4 more years of Bush.
October 30, 2008 at 8:09 pm
i love the picture in the header of your page…
i appreciate your getting info out there about voting, and as much as i love your electoral map, its a little generous ^_^
October 30, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Thanks douglaskev. We’re just glad you visited. I guess we’ll know in 5 more days… I for one don’t want to be overconfident.
October 30, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Bush is not endorsing McCain’s campaign because he knows that McCain does not want him to publicly support him. Usually it is a good thing for a president to endorse a candidate, but with Bush being blamed for the failing economy and his approval rating being below 30%, his support would be like a kiss of death for McCain. The republican candidate is already being haunted by the legacy of our current president. They are both republican and it is being said that, if elected, McCain would contiue the same policies of the Bush Administration, which is not a good thing for McCain. So at this point, he is avoiding any further association with the our current Commander and Chief.
October 30, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Well, a president with a less than 30% approval rating is a political liability. And McCain hates Bush after the robocalls that put him out of the race in 2000.
October 30, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Did Clinton, the kiss of death at the time, campaign for Gore? What was Obama finally forced to promise the Clintons….a Supreme Court nomination?
McCain did everything he could to derail Bush’s agenda for the first 5/6 years until he decided to run for the presidency. The first five years he had a low 67% conservative voting record always voting with the opposition.
Bush’s record for the majority of his term was better than most……he got us through the Clinton recession, low across-the- board taxes, 4% unemployment, record low mortgage rates, record highs in the market, and kept us safe from another attack. Then the anti-war crowd and those still filled with hate and revenge took over……and all we heard were irrational vile attacks against Bush.
Dems took over in 2006 accomplished nothing but a 13% low approval rating, higher gas prices, and the training wheel 2-year Obama campaign began. At this point the media joined in the lovefest and the Fannie Mae subprime fiasco followed. We’re facing another recession like the one that hit us in November of 2000…but that one all Dems denied…and candidate Bush was chastised for daring to speak of just how rotten the economy was because of the bust of the dot.com’s and telecoms?
Bush won in Iraq despite the “white flag-waving Obama”!
Welcome to the New World of Obama, Chicago’s creation. After swimming in the sewers of Chicago, Obama will sure bring “change” to Washington….Chicago-style “change” with the beloved Cafferty’s and the entire media continuing to cover-up!
October 31, 2008 at 12:17 am
@ Jazziest: “Bush won in Iraq”?! What planet do you live in ?!
October 31, 2008 at 12:40 am
jazziest,
Bill Clinton with a consistent 66% approval rating (PollingReport.com) was the kiss of death in 2000? You mean the election in which Gore won the popular vote after being endorsed by “the kiss of death?”
McCain did everything he could to derail Bush by voting with him 90% of the time over 8 years according to Congressional Quarterly? That’s a funny way to derail a presidency by supporting the very president you’re trying to derail 9 times out of 10… How come I’ve never tried helping people I don’t like 9 times out of 10 to make them fail?
Now, the Clinton recession as in the tech bubble that burst after he left office? See, I thought that in the US, problems in the market caused recession, but apparently it’s the president that runs the economy, right?
And of course, who would people who were called traitors and hippies and terrorist sympathizers and fake Americans because they disagreed with Bush’s policies be mad? They should just take the insult and thank him for it. Obviously disarming Iraq of their vast storehouse of nukes was the right thing to do… Except it happened in Dick Cheney’s dream and after 5 years we’re still to find squat in Iraq in terms of WMDs.
As for Dems accomplishing little, try to pass a law or two with the president and his party vetoing everything you do. No, seriously, go for it. Or just try to finish a project at work if your boss keeps rejecting all your materials on the basis that you’re his employee and must be stupid and evil by definition.
I also wonder when Bush was talking about how bad the economy was as a candidate. I seem to remember that in 2004, his whole campaign was about how wonderful the economy was and how it couldn’t be better…
And Bush won in Iraq? So the war is over and over 100,000 troops are all coming home? Why didn’t I know about it? Oh, right, the evil liberal media won’t tell me anything positive. That must be why. Not because the Iraq War still continues.
You know, I would really recommend rejoining the real world. It’s not as nice as your fantasy realm, I admit. But you do get benefits you can’t get anywhere else. Like being in touch with reality…
October 31, 2008 at 4:42 am
gfish,
Nice reply to jazziest. On this point: “And McCain hates Bush after the robocalls that put him out of the race in 2000.” If McCain hates Bush for what he did in 2000 to McCain, then we’re scratching our heads wondering by McCain is doing the same thing to Obama. Oh, yeah, it worked, and republicans do not care how they win, as long as they win. In fact, McCain hates robo-calls so much that he’s running them in his own state! he must be desperate to feel he has to spend money campainging in his own home state.
October 31, 2008 at 4:43 am
jazziest,
There is much that is wrong with the arguments you made.
“What was Obama finally forced to promise the Clintons….a Supreme Court nomination?”
What evidence can you present that Obama made such a promise? Such a baseless statement is called “innuendo”.
The first five years he had a low 67% conservative voting record always voting with the opposition.
If McCain, by his own admission, voted with Bush “90% of the time”, then how do you conclude that he was “always voting with the opposition”? The only way your statement could amke sense is if you admit that, for at least some of those votes, there wasn’t much controversy and that everyone voted for the bill. That’s the only way he could vote with both Bush and the opposition. But since it contradicts the odd point you were trying to make, your statement is meaningless.
Bush’s record for the majority of his term was better than most……he got us through the Clinton recession, low across-the- board taxes, 4% unemployment, record low mortgage rates, record highs in the market, and kept us safe from another attack. Then the anti-war crowd and those still filled with hate and revenge took over……and all we heard were irrational vile attacks against Bush.
First of all, the conservative mantra that taxes should always be low is nothing but pure ideological claptrap. It makes piss poor economic sense. Your assessment of the economy as positive is willfully ignorant of the details of that economy. Money was flowing and the stock market was (artificially) high, but that wealth went straight to the topmost income earners. The gap between the wealthiest and the rest of us under Bush grew faster than at any time in modern history. And weren’t the “record low mortgage rates” one of the factors that led to the current economic crisis? And as for that “kept us safe from attack”, that is false logic, known as the Logical Fallacy. Just because Event B followws Event A, it does not logically follow that Event A caused Event B. Likewise, just because Event B failed to happen following Event A, it does not logically folow that Event A prevented Event B. And for all your praise for Bush that we were not attacked, I must ask you, “At what price?” Our civil liberties were curtailed in the name of false promises that we were going to be attacked. You do understand, do you not, that the president and his cabinet LIED about the danger Iraq posed to us? That is a fact. Dick Armey even said that Cheney pulled him aside and told him that Saddam had familial connections to al Qaeda and would support them (completely false) and that Saddam was close to building a “suitcase nuke” (again, a bald-faced lie). This was how they won support for their internationally illegal invasion of Iraq. Bush deserved all the criticism he got and more.
Dems took over in 2006 accomplished nothing but a 13% low approval rating, higher gas prices…
As many conservatives we have engaged like to do, you take the approval rating for the COngress as a whole and attribute 100% of it to people’s attitudes towards just the Democrats. I believe if you look into that a little closer, you will find that most people have a lower opinion of the Republicans than they do the Democrats. And it wasn’t liberal economic policies that led to record gas prices, it was conservative policies.
… and the training wheel 2-year Obama campaign began. At this point the media joined in the lovefest and the Fannie Mae subprime fiasco followed.
If i recall, the media were all saying that Sen Hillary Clinton was going to walk away with the nomination without a serious fight. And there’s that logical fallacy again.. What the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac failures had to do with your perception that the media was having a lovefest with Obama escapes me.
Bush won in Iraq despite the “white flag-waving Obama”!
Arguably the most laughable thing you posted here. But first, I need to ask you something. Who was fighting the war in Iraq? Bush? Or the soldiergs he illegally sent there? If there was anything that could be called a “success” about the fiasco in Iraq, it happened despite Bush, not because of him. From the beginning, his tactics and strategy almost guaranteed that the troops would be there for the long haul. It was never his intention to get to the point where our troops could come back home. Never.
Finally, the only comment your last paragraph deserves is my sincere wish and hopes that you will get the psychiatric help you clearly need to get over your hateful feelings.
October 31, 2008 at 5:18 am
We know why Bush isn’t campaigning for McCain…it is certainly a decision made by the McCain campaign; afterall, aren’t we all sick enough of hearing Obama repeat the ridiculous line “another 4 years of Bush”, over and over again? The more pertinent question might be, why is Bill Clinton “campaigning” for Obama (or is he)?
October 31, 2008 at 6:02 am
politixican,
Could you please let us know why you think the line “another four years of Bush” is ridiculous?
McCain has said (and we all saw it on MTP) that on the essential issues, McCain was with Bush all the way. So why is it ridiculous for us to conclude that a vote for McCain is a vote for continuing the policies of George Bush? It is, after all, what McCain was trying to promise Republican voters.
October 31, 2008 at 6:23 am
Because George W. is a cunt! That bitch never liked me because I never voted with him.
If decent American citizens are undecided yet – and I am sure there are a lot, just look at the polls – then they just ought to question: Who has the greater experience? Then they know the answer: It’s me!
That Obama has no experience in foreign policy. I do. I meet important internationals every day like president Putin of Germany. Or King Charles from Dublin.
The American people know that. That’s why they will vote for me.
And btw., don’t buy that crap that American voters would pretend to say No to Obama because they would look like racists. When they vote against him on Tuesday it’s because they are convinced I am the right guy for the right job.
October 31, 2008 at 6:55 am
…aren’t we all sick enough of hearing Obama repeat the ridiculous line “another 4 years of Bush”, over and over again?
I never get tired of hearing the truth.
October 31, 2008 at 6:56 am
Welcome back to the Zoo, Senator McCain.
October 31, 2008 at 10:30 am
Wayne,
“If McCain hates Bush for what he did in 2000 to McCain, then we’re scratching our heads wondering by McCain is doing the same thing to Obama.”
Because, as you said, it worked and he hired the very same guy who made the Bush robocalls in 2000 as his campaign adviser.
October 31, 2008 at 10:46 am
I know, gfish. To me, this should call his integrity into question. Either he thinks what the Bush people did to him in 2000 was okay (in which case he shouldn’t have complained about it), or he thinks it was a despicably low thing to do (in which case he shouldn’t do it himself.)
October 31, 2008 at 11:31 am
Same reason Ahmadinnijad – however it’s spelled isn’t campaigning for Obama.
October 31, 2008 at 11:32 am
Nice try, Jeffy.
October 31, 2008 at 11:56 am
Well, you’re right there. Achmadinajad isn’t campaigning for Obama but Al Qaeda wants McCain to win.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/21/AR2008102102477.html
Kinda throws that argument right out the old window, now doesn’t it?
My suggestion? Move away from the Rush radio hour…you are losing your minds.
October 31, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Perhaps he isn’t because McCain wants to distance himself from him? After all he endorsed all that Bush stands for.
November 1, 2008 at 4:12 am
Bush and his Arab friends are behind the hiding of the terrorist Muslim tapes of Michelle Obama.
I heard those tapes. They are devastating to Obama. But they – George W. and the LA Times – keep these tapes locked with Arab money. There is also Osama bin Laden on that tape! I saw it with my own eyes.
November 1, 2008 at 8:22 am
“John McCain”
First, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you are not really the insane Senator from Arizona.
Second, with all due respect, I do not believe you. Your claim strains credulity past the breaking point.
Third, you make no sense. Okay, are these audio tapes that you heard, or were they video tapes that you saw with your “own eyes”? There seems to be some inconsistency in your claim.
Lastly, if there really were tapes that could be damaging to Sen Obama’s presidential bid, then why would George Bush, a man known for acting like a petulant child, a man known for being petty and mean-spirited, a man known for taking the low road even when the high road would have done just as well, why would he help keep them secret?
In short, I think your comment about “the terrorist Muslim tapes of Michelle Obama” is, as they say in political science circles, a crock of shit.
November 1, 2008 at 8:46 am
This John McCain is as crazy as the presidential candidate. Sounds like he has about the same IQ too.
November 1, 2008 at 9:02 am
API and FOX News have copies now after many people were killed who helped transfer those secret tapes to decent Americans. These patriots risked their lives to bring the tapes to the American media. People were murdered, many injured only to prevent the tapes from being released to the public.
I saw those tapes. Michelle Obama is seen on those tapes. She is seen with top terrorists, kissing them and even doing more, if you know what I mean.
Believe it or not, she is also seen with Osama bin Laden!
I was able to obtain a fraction of that tape and I am publishing it here for you, my fellow American voters. Look it up here.
I demand that these tapes are released now by FOX News which always claimed to be my friends.
November 1, 2008 at 9:43 am
I think someone slipped some acid into this guys bag of candy last night.. Wow.. What a trip!
November 1, 2008 at 11:50 am
John McCain,
It’s time to put your keyboard away and remove yourself from the long list of internet users. You are no damn good at this game.
Your “link” utterly failed to provide me with proof that any kind of tapes exist proving a connection between Michelle Obama and al Qaeda. And do you want to know why I believe that? Because it’s apparent that you created that website and posted those comments today (Nov 1st), and the only thing on there is the exact same comments you posted here. In other words, you are using the words you wrote here to prove that the words you wrote here are accurate. That’s circular reasoning and it proves nothing.
Your allegations are spurious at best, slanderous and libelous at worst. The tapes of which you speak do not exist, and you cannot prove they exist because they simply do not exist. So stop making these false charges. Thank you. Have a nice day.
November 1, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Wow, John…you give better satire than SNL.
That there’s funny stuff, and I don’t care who you are!
Please, please release the pictures of you standing next to Abraham Lincoln. That will prove, positively, that you are the most patriotic of all! Who can deny that? And you standing there, right next to President Lincoln, will show the whole world that you stood hand in hand with one of the greatest presidents in American history. Another Republican, I might add!
Comments are closed.