My Photo

Welcome to Mannionville

  • Politics, art, movies, television, books, parenting, home repair, caffeine addiction---you name it, we blog it. Since 2004. Call for free estimate.

The Tip Jar

  • Please help keep this blog running strong with your donation

Help Save the Post Office: My snail mail address

  • Lance Mannion
    109 Third St.
    Wallkill, NY 12589

Save a Blogger From Begging...Buy Stuff

The one, the only

Sister Site

« The Force and the cell phone signal are strong in this one | Main | How smart I'm not. Part One. »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Bias is as bias does

I find your reaction odd. Hillary has been going around for weeks claiming that she and McCain are better than Obama, as if running for McCain's VP. Where were you then?


Actually, Clinton has NOT gone around saying she and McCain "are better" than Obama.

She has said that she and McCain have experience, and that Obama doesn't.

And, obviously, Obama doesn't.


This was a gaffe by Obama, but I too find the outrage laughable considering Hil's commander-in-chief threshold remarks.


Yes, he stepped in it. It was a stupid thing to say, though I think it can be successfully recovered from.

But it's splitting hairs to say that Clinton did no wrong when she deliberately and repeatedly said that she and McCain had "crossed the CiC threshold" and Obama hadn't. No matter how you spin it, she ended up ranking herself and the Republican candidate ahead of Obama on that measure. She didn't "misspeak" there any more than she "misspoke" about sniper fire in Bosnia.

(Yes, she has now started saying that voters should support either Dem over McCain. But that doesn't undo what she said weeks ago.)

Ken Houghton

"They're exhausted. They're losing focus. They're growing surly. They're getting punch drunk and goofy. Both Hillary and Obama have developed bad cases of foot in mouth syndrome. They need to be saved from themselves."

Give you a subtle hint: the winner of the primary isn't going to get a bleeding vacation for the next four month or so until the Convention.

Obama's "eloquence" advantage is fading, and his Repubican-talking-points positions are becoming more obvious.

I fear what will be left by October. (Fortunately, I'll be in another country by then, watching in horror.)

And for those who call this the same as Hillary's C-in-C comment: What World do you live in? How many votes would you expect to win by claiming that a Veteran, a former POW, and a long-time Senator would not be fit to be C-in-C? (My number is large, and significantly different than zero—on the negative side of the ledger.)

McCain has qualifications that should make him clearly capable of being C-in-C, and denying that would have been silly. The claim that he will clearly be a better President than GWB is, otoh, idiocy. (He has the same domestic agenda, a similar determination to expand the current war, and the intent of increasing the deficit even more. This is not a basis for claiming he will be an improvement, and that sound-bite will be prominent in the final weeks of the actual election.)


Ken, what world do you live in that a candidate escapes criticism for deliberately and repeatedly bringing up an issue that potentially favors the opposing party and damages their own? And alleging that McCain is "clearly" capable of being CiC doesn't impress me, either. He has military experience, granted. But he is also rash, lazy, and judgmental, with a hair-trigger temper. He is the least fit to be CinC of all of them.

Obama said something dumb in this case, obviously. But to try to spin this as full-scale praise for McCain, or as an example of pandering, or as something way dumber than deliberately kneecapping your Democratic opponent strikes me as some otherworldly partisanship for Clinton.


I agree with Mary. Clinton's comments were worse since they were used to attack her fellow Dem.
But Obama does need to get back on message.

Vir Modestus

Obama's people backpeddled by saying something to the effect of "Anyone would be better than Bush." Not sure if it helped since the original statement was a big gaffe by Obama. But both of the Dems need to keep in mind who the true opponent is. No CiC threshold crap, no anyone would be better than Bush crap. Eyes on the prize, people. Eyes on the prize.

calling all toasters

Obama definitely stepped in it here. If he wanted to match the Hillary Responsible Rhetoric Test, he would have said that either he or McCain would be better than Hillary, but instead he said that he or Hillary would be better than McCain.

And he calls himself a Democrat?

David Wilford

The overreaction here and elsewhere is more annoying than what Obama said. It is possible to be a blogger without being a drama queen at the same time, no?


Mistake to say it. Yes, surely a result of fatigue... unlike Hillary's carefully wrought dis: "and Obama has a speech he gave once."

I'm hearing from more and more people who are also fatigued and fed up with the ongoing silly season this has become. Just today, my mother - a PA voter and enormous Bill Clinton fan (she read both of their bios, cover to cover) - emailed that she was watching Bill on C-Span, heard him say something so spurious that she got up and turned him off. "I couldn't take any more Bill Clinton! Imagine that," she wrote under the subject line "Hard To Believe." It may be that with 24-hour cable, blogging drama queens, and internet intensities, we have entered a new world where it's harder than we think for Dems to come back together for the general.

gypsy howell

I saw Obama make that speech during his whistlestop tour in PA on Saturday, and the reporter is quoting it out of context. The line about George Bush was clearly meant to slam Bush, not praise McCain. Obama went on to talk about the failed presidency of George Bush, and emphasized, in great detail, that McCain was going to pursue the same policies, or worse.

To the crowd watching the speech, I can assure you it was plain as day what he was saying, and there was absolutely no mistaking what his message was: if you want more of the same, vote for McCain.

Having seen Obama deliver the speech live, I was really pissed when I later read the dishonest spin the reporter put on it, trying to suggest that Obama was saying that McCain was somehow an acceptable choice in November.

When your choice is to believe the candidates or believe the press, your first choice shouldn't be taking the press' word for it. Surely we've all been burned enough times to know that.

gypsy howell

"McCain has qualifications that should make him clearly capable of being C-in-C, and denying that would have been silly."

Getting shot down in your plane and being a POW does not make you C-I-C material. If it did, I'd be head of the Dept of Transportation because I've been in a car accident.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Data Analysis

  • Data Analysis


April 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30  

Movies, Music, Books, Kindles, and more

For All Your Laundry Needs

In Case of Typepad Emergency Break Glass

Be Smart, Buy Books

Blog powered by Typepad