John McCain continues to stumble....

Group launches ad against McCain's joke

By LIBBY QUAID, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 48 minutes ago



The liberal group MoveOn.org is launching an ad against Republican John McCain (news, bio, voting record) and his joke about bombing Iran, arguing that the nation "can't afford another reckless president."

The group plans to spend about $100,000 to air a commercial on network and some cable television stations in Iowa and New Hampshire, states that hold early contests in the presidential nomination process, spokesman Alex Howe said Friday.

McCain, campaigning Wednesday in South Carolina, answered a question about military action against Iran with the chorus of the surf-rocker classic "Barbara Ann."

"That old, eh, that old Beach Boys song, Bomb Iran," he said. "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, anyway, ah ..."

His audience laughed, but MoveOn.org called the comment dangerous.

"America has lived through six years of a reckless foreign policy," an announcer says in the ad. "We're stuck in Iraq. More than 3,000 Americans are dead. And thousands more wounded.

"Now comes John McCain with his answer to what we should do about Iran. John McCain? We can't afford another reckless president."

The group ran ads in the same states in January, criticizing the Arizona senator's support for sending more troops to Iraq.

McCain defended the joke during a campaign stop in Nevada on Thursday.

"Please, I was talking to some of my old veterans friends," he told reporters in Las Vegas. "My response is, Lighten up and get a life."

Asked if his joke was insensitive, McCain said: "Insensitive to what? The Iranians?"

His campaign said the latest commercial is predictable.

"It comes as no surprise that America's most liberal interest group would attack John McCain's belief that we cannot allow Iran to destroy Israel," McCain spokesman Matt David said:

The head of MoveOn said McCain displayed "more out-of-control bravado."

"The point is, a presidential candidate just doesn't kid around about bombing other countries, especially countries with high tensions, and especially where a diplomatic solution is our only hope," Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org Political Action, said Friday.

McCain's comments, posted on YouTube.com, had been viewed at least 118,056 times as of Friday morning.

Youtube

*********************************************************

This guy just cant get out of his own way. I personally think its funny (the beach boys theme), but McCain just dosent get the fact that he is in a presidential climate now and he cant (politically) expect these types of jibes to go under the radar.

So for my republican american friends out there on the org whats the concensus on the republican field of candidates? I truly want to like them and vote for them as I have squandered enough of my time on the left in the past. To be honest the 3 front runners all have weaknesses that really make me nervous.

Any takers?

I'm pulling for Fred Thompson. The only conservative who's close to running.

McCain and Guliani - no thanks, try reading the constitution guys. Romney isn't as bad - at least yet.

But the hubbub over this joke is stupid. Not that I'm surprised.

CR

Well, I think it shows some political acumen on McCain's part. He's constantly fielding criticism that he's not conservative enough, not hawkish enough, too soft on our enemies. It's the first effort I've seen out of him to play to the base and not the middle of the entire American field, something he needs to do first, to get the nomination.

Honestly, MoveOn.Org should be more careful. I'm an engineer and I can come up with a perfect retort commerical: "Democrats... worried about hurting Iran's feelings first, American security last..."

I'm not saying I agree with that. I'm just saying if I came up with that in 30 seconds, just imagine what Karl and the boys have in the works.

McCain = lacks the sense of charm and vigor he had at the outset of the 2000 campaign. Position on the Iraq war doesn't appeal as much to the large swath of semi-independents he appealed to last time. Plays better with the true-blue conservatives, but the religious right is still skeptical of his comments during the last attempt and the constitutionalist GOP'ers are NOT happy with his stance on the border or on campaign finance.

Guliani = putative front-runner with oodles of charisma and gravitas points picked up by his solid performance during the 9-11 events. This demonstration of ability to act under pressure is his biggest appeal. Has taken a constructivist justices pledge for the SCOTUS and scores heavily on law and order. His support for abortion and his relatively liberal stance on social issues do not play well with the base.

Romney = best money raiser so far and, despite his previous support for abortion, most of his recently expressed views are pretty middle of the road for the GOP. Coming from Mass almost guarantees that he'll have to concede his home state to the opposition in the general -- a poor starting point.

Thompson = not yet officially running and therefore behind in the finances game (which is more an more crucial with the early primary setup). Probably the best "gravitas" and stage presence as a leader and has a solidly conservative record behind him that will play very well for the base. If there is a contender who can get in at a late date and pull it off, Fred is the one.

Most of the others simply don't have the resources and support so far to be called major candidates.

Thanks for the replies.

I honestly dont know much about Fred Thompson, I'll keep an eye out for his eventual apprerance on meet the press.

I do agree with Don Corleone that this might acutally be a political move for McCain. It certainly sets him up to appeal to that portion of the party who is hawkish, and sets up rebuttal potentials as Don points out.

@Seamus nice summary thanks. Guliani, I dont know something about him just strikes me as off, is there a skeleton or two in this guys closet? Maybe its because I'm a Boston guy and he is NY, but hes to charming if you ask me.

Good old Mitt, his fundraising has been from a lot of first time donors from the business world and his largest donor base was from Utah. He was a good govenor in the sense that he made dam good efforts at subdueing the Mass liberal coallition, sadly in most cases he failed and in the end thats a liabilty for him.

McCain is still intriquing to me mainly because I dont want a retreat from the unilateral foriegn policy of Mr Bush, I just want it applied more intelligently with less intervention and more preventative action with minimal investment.

So he fulfills (somewhat) my most important foriegn adgenda. Domestically My number 1 priority is a reinvestment in infrastructure (include the social infrastructure like SS reform, and health care). I feel like we have spent so much time abroad that as a whole the U.S. internally has remained status quo.

While thats good to a degree its hardly encourging given the aging population, budget deficits, and global warming.

big deal. and moveon.org are a bunch of retards who lost their credibility long, long ago.

I personally found the joke to be rather funny. Hilarious to see the dem's making a fuss over this. Definately a stupid thing to do also, can quickly backfire in the dem's face. As don has pointed out.

In fact it's siggy material.

I think his retorts were hilarious.

I chuckled too. He's BTDT, so I was certain he was simply jesting.

Easy move for the Dems, though. Play up the McCain comments a bit and you generate a few hundred kays more in donations at the expense of a candidate you really don't think you'll be facing in the general election anyway while scoring a few cheap points with your own anti-war supporters (and that is NOT an insignificant segment for the Dems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I chuckled too. He's BTDT, so I was certain he was simply jesting.

Easy move for the Dems, though. Play up the McCain comments a bit and you generate a few hundred kays more in donations at the expense of a candidate you really don't think you'll be facing in the general election anyway while scoring a few cheap points with your own anti-war supporters (and that is NOT an insignificant segment for the Dems.

---

Good analysis and part of what is of concern for me, the democrats are becoming more and more savvy in thier politics and taking opportunities when they show themselves.

The last thing republicans need is a united, focused, and opportunistic opposition party. Regardless of the vulnerability of McCain at present and this seeming "no brainer" for them, this resembles republican strategy. Taking an offhand joking comment by a candidate and turning it into a fundraising, and political opportunity.

They learned

The joke was not funny.

Guiliani and Romney are the only proven leaders and administrators of the group, although Thompson is definately worth a try.

McCain lost. He just needs to stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

The last thing republicans need is a united, focused, and opportunistic opposition party. Regardless of the vulnerability of McCain at present and this seeming "no brainer" for them, this resembles republican strategy. Taking an offhand joking comment by a candidate and turning it into a fundraising, and political opportunity.

They learned

---

They did indeed. The new democrat party is, at least temporarily, as united a confederacy as I have seen from them. Their internet organs are effective money genarators and major players in the platform and tone of the party.

Long term, however, they have a few problems. Too much of their unity is vested in:

beating Bush (as he is the anti-christ), and

stopping the use of the military for all non-UN peacekeeping/rescue missions.

While the latter will continue, it is only palatable to the larger public when that public perceives us to be bogged down in some engagement. The former cannot work past 2008.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Long term, however, they have a few problems. Too much of their unity is vested in:

beating Bush (as he is the anti-christ), and

---

absolutely agreed, Heck Kerry spent more time talking about Bush then Bush did.

The Democrats need a unified adgenda which (for them) will be a challenge. Without that, this is just a cycle and the republicans will be back in the majority in one of the houses.

although on the otherside of the coin, long term for the republicans dosent look bright either because very few of them went against mr bush. Despite the inherent weakness in Bush bashing long term, it carries an equal weight for both parties, republicans will not easily explain away thier support for his adgenda 2008 and beyond.

IE: John McCain

Perhaps, but once the drumbeat about Iraq lessens, the American public will back-burner that issue more -- and the basic GOP stance of supporting the War against Terror plays well (even if mistakes and miscues cause problems). Remember, the "destruction" of the GOP wrought by Vietnam and Watergate lasted all of six years. The "we're the USA and we should be proud and 'throw an elbow' now and then" stance is very popular with most of the population base. Anti-war support in the USA is ALWAYS ephemeral.

The one theme that might -- and it's a bit dated to be fair -- play better is isolationism, but that hasn't been a Dem theme since before Woodrow Wilson. To have credibility with that, they'd have to work to close the border etc. I just don't see it. This kerflaffle of a conflict isn't as painful as was Vietnam, so I don't see the GOP hammered with it more than another 2 election cycles -- and I'd be surprised if it were key after '08.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

and his largest donor base was from

---

What? I'd love to see that backed up with something- I tend to doubt that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

I'm pulling for Fred Thompson. The only conservative who's close to running.

---

I'm with you. A conservative who actually has some charm, plus Hollywood connections.... I tingle. :beam:

The only thing that I can think of that McCain talks some sense on is his foreign policy. However, he seems to have temper problems- which are never good. And more importantly, he's been on the wrong side of too many important issues to get any consideration from me. I'd probably pick him over any of the current crop of Democrats- there's certainly nothing to get excited about over there -but then again, I might just take a throw-away 3rd party vote instead. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

What? I'd love to see that backed up with something- I tend to doubt that.

---

I was wrong, 18% was from california, 13% from Utah. In the chart listed it states 52% from other states but lists the top contributing states.

It also lists donation per zip code and Utah is 3 of the top 5.

Source: http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/ge...286&cycle=2008

I hate it when people make a big deal out of throwaway comments.

Churchill would never stand a chance of geting elected these days if this the cause of outrage. Funny how times change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

I hate it when people make a big deal out of throwaway comments.

---

Directed at me I assume? I didn't take the comment as "throwaway" at all. Romney is mormon and there are plenty of accusations swirling around about him being funded almost completely by the mormon church. This, of courses, isn't true- but the accusation gets leveled again and again nonetheless. 13% of his contributions come from Utah- that's alot, but you could take all of that money away and he'd still be the top Republican fund raiser by a wide margin.

I don't know if it was Odin's intent to dismiss him as the 'Mormon' candidate, but it'd not the case regardless. BTW, great site Odin. :bow:

Directed at MoveOn.org ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

Directed at MoveOn.org ~:)

---

Ah, well... it makes a bit more sense from that perspective. :beam:

Quote:

---

Churchill would never stand a chance of geting elected these days if this the cause of outrage. Funny how times change.

---

Churchill was only elected to lead the country by the population once , and in that case he did it despite having less votes , even if you add the partners votes to his he still got less votes than those he defeated in the election .
It was amazing that he got elected to power at all considering his landslide defeat when he stood the time before , and that at the time he did win he was really suffering visibly from his drink and health problems .

Anyhow as for the topic , McCain made a funny about bombing Iran .
He did it at a time when they are asking Iran to be really nice and do the world a really big favour , but are refusing to talk with them , yet make threats that both Iran and the US know are empty .
Maybe he thought it would go down well with the "base" .
It makes you wonder about his level of intelligence , and the intelligence of those that he is trying to appeal to .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xiahou

I don't know if it was Odin's intent to dismiss him as the 'Mormon' candidate, but it'd not the case regardless. BTW, great site Odin. :bow:

---

My intent was to discuss John McCain and the republican field. I live in MA, Romney was my Govenor and I voted for him. His religion isnt a big deal to me, that said it is a twist to his bid for president we havent seen.

When i looked at the numbers I saw the top 5 zip codes for his contributions and made the comment from there. It dosent matter to me if he gets his money from Mormons or not.

McCain's humor draws criticism again

Republican presidential contender John McCain (news, bio, voting record) dismissed a demand by a prominent House Democrat that he apologize to U.S. troops in Iraq for making a joke about an explosive device, saying critics should "lighten up."

In an appearance Tuesday night on Comedy Central's "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," McCain joked that he had brought a gift for Stewart back from a recent trip to Iraq.

"What do you want to start with, the bomb Iran song or the walk through the market in Baghdad?" Stewart asked McCain, referring to two recent controversies involving statements by the Arizona senator.

"I think maybe shopping in Baghdad," McCain responded. "... I had something picked out for you, too — a little IED (improvised explosive device) to put on your desk."

On Wednesday, Rep. John Murtha (news, bio, voting record), D-Pa., demanded in a speech on the House floor that McCain apologize to troops for joking about the explosive devices that are responsible for many of the casualties in Iraq.

"Imagine a presidential candidate making a joke about IEDs when our kids are getting blown up," Murtha said.

"I don't know how to respond to that kind of hysteria," McCain said when asked about Murtha's demand during an appearance on ABC's "Good Morning America" on Thursday. "When I was in combat and tough situations we used humor all the time, and all I can say to Murtha and others is lighten up and get a life."

McCain had a similar response last week to criticism of his joking rendition at a campaign appearance in South Carolina of the opening lyrics of the Beach Boys rock classic "Barbara Ann," calling the tune "Bomb Iran" and changing the words to "bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, anyway, ah ..."

***************************************************

Is he digging a hole here?

I wouldn't vote for the guy but I love it when he talks. "...get a life"? :laugh4: :2thumbsup:

Were it practical, I'd vote for the Constitutionalists over both of these gaggles of nattering mediocrities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Were it practical, I'd vote for the Constitutionalists over both of these gaggles of nattering mediocrities.

---

I would vote for a constitutional ammendment to remove the 2 term limit on the presidancy over hillary clinton.

4 more years, we need Mo`Bush.

Vote, Bush for 08.

That may be the lamest thing you've ever said on these forums. yeah. more Bush. Awesome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

Is he digging a hole here?

---

Nah, not in my eyes anyway. I also see it as really light stuff. And the opposition is merely twisting words and getting their panties in a bunch over "lack of sensitivity" and such. Puhleaze, let's not talk anything about Iraq or Afghanistan, 'cause we might, somehow, hurt the feelings of, I dunno, somebody, somewhere.

But hey, it's cheap and easy to try to gain political capital by getting holier-than-thou and pointing a finger at your opponents and yapping "apologise for this, apologise for that, blah, blah,...".

Non-issue, and the others' ridiculous overreactions merely perpetuate this atmosphere of political over-correctness and this "apologising" trend.