Sweetheart Deal

[lynndeweese]

The funniest part is that now it appears that Obama is Bush on steroids, continue the Iraq war, increase the Afghan war, start wars in Pakistan & Uzbekistan... four more years of failed Clinton/Bush/Obama imperial policies. Nader never looked so prophetic.

[tubebunny7]

Oh get a room already!

[bstndance]

What a homophobic ad! "gay" is now a punchline??? I'm through with the democratic party!

[falconwings1982]

This was a valentine's day ad, the theme is obvious. It's meant to give out the message that John McCain is nothing more than a third bush term not as an attempt to bash anybody that is gay. I would agree with you had this ad not been aired on valentine's day.

[bstndance]

Excuses excuses... GLAAD has stood firm on the belief that gay is not a punchline. Therefore this ad is inappropriate.

And how is McCain another Bush term when McCain was ridiculed for most of the Bush years as being a closet Democrat.

[falconwings1982]

You're making the faulty assumption that this ad uses gay as a punchline. Whether John McCain is a Third Bush Term is obviously for you and all of Americans to decide. But this was just a Valentine's Day ad. It would have, in my opinion, been inappropriate any other day. Of course anyone with a brain would know that John McCain and George Bush are married and have children. I think you're using this as an excuse to cast Democrats as anti-gay when that couldn't be more further from the truth.

[falconwings1982]

But of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion. McCain is not a closet Democrat. How could he be when he voted with George Bush 90% of the time. He's trying to appeal to the far right. Anyways, I've said enough for the moment.

[UGOTDAJACK]

This is GREAT!!! For far too long those evil ass neocons have been playing dirty tricks against us democrats and the DNC has just sat back and twiddled their fucking thumbs like a bunch of scared bitches...but not under Howard Dean and my homeboy Barak...we aint sitting by while you neocons try to imply Obama's a terrorist and his wife is un american. Nope! not this time. This time...Obama said knock you out!!!!!

[pacroyalty113]

Though i totally support democrats and agree that mccain is like a bush third term... i feel that the way this video implied homosexuality among bush and mccain was frankly quite a shameful attack that has no factual proof.

[falconwings1982]

First of all this was a Valentine's Day ad so the theme was obvious. I thought it was a clever ad and there was no homophobia being fanned. It is not implying homosexuality. The title of the ad is Sweetheart Deal, which basically states that McCain has promised a Third Bush Term amounting to exactly what the title is. The main point of the ad is what you yourself said in your own words "mccain is like a third bush term". It is not only appropriate for Valentines, but very clever too!

[pacroyalty113]

you dont call two men giving each other a friendly hug at the end, which was surrounded by a heart to imply that it was something more, is insinuating a homosexual relationship? though i respect mccain and bush, even though i may sharply divide with them over numerous issues, this ad is shameful.

[falconwings1982]

No and here's why. Once again this was a Valentine's Day ad and the theme is pretty obvious. John McCain had pretty much locked up the nomination a bit over a week before Feb. 14th (Super Tuesday). Look up Sweetheart deal on wikipedia, which describes perfectly the relationship between Bush and McCain. McCain has basically promised a third bush term something Americans definitely do not want. It is in no why insinuating a homosexual relationship.

[JimboTHC]

Maybe if the GOP could go 3 months without getting caught humping a young boy they wouldn't have this problem.

I predict Lindsey Graham will be caught performing fellatio on a mammal in a mens room with in the next year.

[JimboTHC]

This is awesome.

[BobAnonSmith]

i mean come on bush kisses every freakin dude in the government dose anyone else see this hes gotta be gay.

i mean theres more damn footage of him kissing old men then there is of him kissing his wife ...

[WhiteIguana]

Bush & McBush should both be committed. Both are in denial of a declining economy. Our people are suffering & the republicans don't seem to care. Shame on the republican party. I will support either Democratic candidate in 2008. Just so the republicans don't "win" this election. (I'm using the word "win" very loosely)... To think! I used to be "one of them" but never again. I am now an Independent but will proudly support a Democratic candidate. Vote Smart, Vote Democratic 2008.

[CoffeeLiberal]

Leave it to the democratic elitist assholes to use an underlying current of homophobia in a negative caricature of opponents. Almost as clever as calling someone a whore. Oh wait, but they already used that gag when they called Hillary a whore---to use it again would be tiring, no? I would expect this from Republicans, but then again this year, what's up is down and what's democratic is left over republican filth without the creativity. Can't wait to register ind when this debacle is over.

[irishcaeser]

I love when the Democrats use gaybaiting to attacka rival. Where's GLADD andf the HRC? Wait their two busy licking HIlary's and Obama's boots. Such good little lap dogs they are.

[falconwings1982]

Remember, this was done for Valentine's Day, the obvious theme being love. I thought this was a clever ad. Who ever said it was gaybaiting? John McCain, in his efforts to reach out to a disillusioned conservative base, suddenly sheds his "maverick" image (as if he was ever a "maverick") and embraces George Bush policies to the point where he is promising a third Bush term. It does sound like a sweetheart deal to me. Republicans ran in 04 on empty promises and fanned homophobia. let it go already

[VinceP1974]

I love it when gay-bashing is approved when the target is people Democrats hate.

[FabalaFae32]

continued...The government has been PROVEN to be behind the genocidal militias. International law supports-indeed, mandates- intervention on behalf of genocide victims when a genocide has been documented as taking place. There is nothing in common between Iraq and Sudan. your logic is faulty.

[falconwings1982]

I repeat what I asked earlier. Who ever said this was ever gaybashing? It was a Valentine's Day ad! And yes, McCain did enter into a sweetheart deal to promote a 3rd Bush term. The only thing shocking and controversial here is that 28% of Americans at this point still want that! The GOP in 04 ran on a platform they knew they couldn't deliver on (banning gay marriage), promoted fear in the form of exaggerated national security credentials, and swift boated. Their day of reckoning is coming...

[TomAwtry]

The "Course" will "Change" in November!

[mamacal123]

Love the cuddle hug with Bush and McCain.

Bush looks shocked in one pic of closeness!

[roman17m]

Look this espectacular vid v=aqSBPtfp4cQ

[Amontillado11]

Haha, that was pretty funny. Maybe the next gay Republican scandal is Bush and McCain?

[PeterRabbit60]

Florida had no choice. The Republicans set them up to have their primary when they did. Let it play out. Nobody wants a candidate forced upon them. They will revote. Two candidates who say they want the "people" to decide should have no problem with it. As for Obama, he can't even take a poke, much less a punch. He's a lightweight I'm afraid.

[MYPanicAttack]

Florida HAD a choice. The republicans lead the state to hold primaries early but they did have a choice. Pressured? Sure, but fl. democrats wanted the date moved up too.

Plus, does it make sense for Democrats to tell republicans when not to hold a primary? The DNC warned DEMOCRATS not to follow the lead of the REPUBLICANS, but they did anyway. But many states hold democratic and republican primaries weeks or even months apart.

And I'd hardly call the Clinton machine "poking" Obama.

[PeterRabbit60]

Primary days are set by legislation and paid for by the states. Republicans were very clever. If the democrats did not do a primary then who would be paying for their primary? Obviously the DNC didn't money earmarked for it as is demonstrated right now: refusal to pay for a redo. For two candidates who insist that "the people" decide, both of them should be front and center on this issue, striving for Florida and Michigan to be heard. Without those states neither can win the general election.

[MYPanicAttack]

plus hillary clinton was perfectly fine with removing the delegates from Florida and Michigan. She signed the waiver and agreed that it was fair. But all a sudden now since she is behind, she feels that the states where did cheated and are obligated to be seated. What about that?

[PeterRabbit60]

You know Panic, we might not agree but you are one of the few Obama people I have seen who can actually debate reasonably. So I am going to tell you what i think happened here. I think Dean never expected he would need a primary in Florida, that one candidate would get the full delegate numbers first. He didn't earmark any money to them for primary. It didn't happen the way he planned. Dean screwed the pooch. What say you?

[MYPanicAttack]

agreed, but imagine if the DNC rules are changed and the superdelegates get involved and Clinton is elected?

I (and millions of others) would be disgusted b/c we were robbed.

And honestly (and im sure you know this by now), that's the only scenario Clinton can win: She'll need Dean to go back on his word, she's already went back on hers, she needs florida and michigan seated, she needs the superdelegates to put her in the lead... all those things i find horribly corrupt methods.night.

[PeterRabbit60]

Why are you afraid to let this play out? The assumption that because a candidate wants to run for president, therefore everybody else should leave him alone and stay out of his way is ludicrous and not the way either democracy or the real world works. To ignore Florida and Michigan is to lose a general election. NO democrat can win without carrying these large swing states.

[MYPanicAttack]

No, Im not afraid to let this play out. Obama will have more delegates then Clinton either way b/c just like in a Texas 51-47, she walked out with only 1 more delegate. For me, i feel if you break he rules, you should be penalized or everyone will break the rules. The DNC was very clear and you can go on and make a thousand excuses for florida and michigan, but none hold water.

let me ask you this: what if they held a caucus in the two states? would that be fair since primaries cost millions?

[PeterRabbit60]

I can't speak for Michigan but I know Florida would never go for caucus. They have been disinfranchised more than once as you remember. They want legitimate elections and they don't want some ground trooper voting FOR them. Let me ask you this: Do you think Caucuses are as legitimate as elections where every single person gets the opportunity to vote on their own behalf???? If you were going to have the final say over something would you want a complete stranger to make that decision for you?

[MYPanicAttack]

It looks like michigan is headed toward a caucus. A caucus is probably the most earliest form of american voting. sooo... i dont oppose them.

Answer to your question: YES. Since when did every single person not have a voice in caucuses? Maybe if clinton supporters got off their lazy butts more often and where more motivated and if they took elections seriously, the clintons wouldnt have to be so scared of them!

...your last sentence i didnt follow @_@... a complete stranger? huh?

[PeterRabbit60]

Now see here I thought you were above that kind of remark. Dayum!I will tell you why I prefer Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama. Now I don't think I'd want to date her but I think she is smarter than he is and knows a H*LL of a lot more than he does. I think she can think on her feet and he can't. I think she can stand up to swiftboats and he will get chewed up and spit out. But I will vote for the winner. My last sentence: A fraction of voters bartering a decision is not a primary,it's a carnival

[JackSpratt60]

One comment I do want to make about people getting off their "lazy butts" to caucus. The larger states are primary states for a reason. Caucuses take forever to calculate. Look at Texas, they tried it. They still arent done counting. And Seniors and women with babies,for example,can't be hanging around in caucus, voting and then voting again. They should not be disinfranchised and Caucuses do just that.People for the most part want to walk in, vote and leave not get into protracted discussions.

[falconwings1982]

1. Did you complain when Bill Clinton benefited from the same caucuses? Since it is obvious that Hillary is running in large part on the legacy of her husband (as evidenced by the Latino vote), invoking his name is fair game. Hillary knows a lot about pro corporate law. She sat on the board of Wal Mart!! Obama meanwhile taught constitutional law. I say Obama knows more than Hillary. As for Florida, Hillary followers are bold to agree with someone who before Iowa said MI and FL SHOULD NOT COUNT!!

[falconwings1982]

I will say this though. I do think there should be a revote. On this I can agree with Hillary. But it's got to be something that's fair for everyone and the Florida State Democratic Party had better hurry up to fix the problem its leaders created.

[falconwings1982]

Everyone has a to have an impact on caucuses. you don't think some of Obama's supporters have the same issues? He's been doing well because his supporters are more passionate. To suggest that caucuses disenfranchise people is just plain wrong. As long as people have an equal opportunity to attend (unlike in 2000 where a huge number of likely Democratic voters where actually prevented from voting), caucuses are 100% democratic. Furthermore, you should be allowed 2 hours off work to vote/caucus.

[MYPanicAttack]

Howard Dean is my hero for following the rules and not paying for florida and michigan's "re-votes" when they clearly broke the rules.

[MISTAFIEDONEEIGHTSEV]

¥CHECKMATE¥

¥T

[onegreatcountry]

Obama Believers raise the flag for Hope and that is what other candidates don't have. They can't bring hope because they're the ones that have left America hopeless... check out my featured video for more.

[fhqwgads2005]

god damn it, stop saying "my friends" you idiot. oh, and do a better job of reading the teleprompter. oh, and get a new speech writer while you're at it buddy.

[dcydr]

This election is boiling down to being about More-of-the-Same vs Not-in-My-Name. No matter how you spin it, it's about The Past vs The Future. People are going to lean toward the Devils They Know instead of the Angels of Progress every time. I just find it sadly fascinatin'.

[ihenryphoto]

real talk ,I concur

[ThailandKyle]

And Bush will reportedly endorse McCain tomorrow. How funny is that. Shouldn't they keep Bush hidden from here on out?

[PervisJohnson]

Lil' Dubya is the worst president ever, according to historians in Europe and USA, in recent surveys. The corrupt Bush is responsible for 7 years of fear and failure. He debased our reputation and our currency. He murdered a million Iraqi civilians to satisfy the greed of his oil buddies, and the military-industrial complex.

[Zappafan5150]

McCain will be crushed like a bug by Barack Obama

[PervisJohnson]

The Diebold machines will once again decide the election. If Obama is an idealist, he will be smeared, or assassinated if need be. Obama has a 4 point lead over McCain now. Dukakis had a 21 point lead over Daddy Bush, four months before the '88 election. Things change. Never understimate the stupidity of the American public.

[ssj4goku100million]

aww so sweet

[rogueweapon]

mccain is selling his soul for the presidency but the republicans don't have a shot without ron paul.

[cleazenby]

this has to be the video with the longest comments....

[akfak0retlaw]

Obama/Clinton isn't better. They'll both stay in Iraq. McCain is going to do the same thing Clinton and Obama will do and that's what Bush has been doing. If you think there is a choice here, you're mildly retarded. You can either pat yourself on the back for voting for a war hero, pat yourself on the back for voting for a woman, or pat yourself on the back for voting for a black guy, because that's the only difference between them. If you haven't learned that yet you maybe completely retarded.

[ebvl27]

Wow are you dumb. What in the wolrd is the basis of your assertion that Obama will continue the war in Iraq? Just because you learned how to type words doesn't mean what you write is true. Maybe it is YOU that is completely retarded, although I don't think most retards are vacant minded enough to proffer such an unfounded assertion.

[akfak0retlaw]

When asked whether or not we would still have troops in Iraq at the end of his 4 years Obama said yes. He said he would remove a major chunk of combat troops out, but leave a small contingent force to protect civilian contractors and conduct anti-terrorist operations. Sounds like same mission except with fewer troops. And guess were those combat troops are going? Home? Nope. Darfur! Where there is another civil war and.. wait for it.. OIL! Yes there's oil in Darfur. Sounds like more of the same?

[astroman12349384]

Then... VOTE FOR RON PAUL.

[ebvl27]

Yeah, Ron Paul, what a wonderful idea. Let the era of ultra-right wing isolationism begin. Not to mention forgetting all about ANY assistance to the needy, far-right social policies (i.e. abortion) and oh yeah, RON PAUL IS A RACIST WHO SENT OUT NUMEROUS HATE-FILLED NEWSLETTERS IN THE 80s and 90s. Other than that, yeah, Ron Paul, great idea!

[FabalaFae32]

yes. Vote for the racist reactionary. Let's do an experiment and see how low America can go!! Vote for Ron Paul, ladies and gents, to see the extent to which America can fall!

[ebvl27]

Uh, yeah, and how is having a small contingent of a small fraction of the size of existing troops, and ending all major combat operations in less than one year analagous to McCain's open-ended commitment? Apparently you are unable to differentiate between these vastly different strategies because you charactarize them as being the same. Indeed, you wrote "McCain is going to do the same thing as Clinton and Obama will do and that's the same thing Bush is doing." This is utterly baseless.

[akfak0retlaw]

Obama's small contingent force will be housed in permanent bases, which will probably be there for the next 100 years! Ending major combat operations doesn't mean all combat operations stop. It'll be like I said, same mission, smaller force, because he needs the troops for Darfur. The same things they'll be doing means getting involved in foreign conflict for "Noble" reason, i.e. Civil war, terrorist, genocide, but come to find out there also happens to be lots of oil near by.

[ebvl27]

What is your source for your assertion that Obama intends major combat operations in Darfur? If you're method of argument is making shit up, I admit it will be excedingly difficult to keep up with you.

[akfak0retlaw]

Directly for the horses mouth. Look up "Barack Obama on Darfur" on you tube. He'll tell you himself about the troops he wants to put there. Maybe that'll convince you, if he tells you himself.

[akfak0retlaw]

Oh, and you might want to look up a consumer reports article that talks about candidates and where they have investments. Obama before he started his campaign had some investments based in Darfur. Unloaded them before running. Probably didn't want to make it too obvious why he wants to go there with troops.

[emanon111]

Obama may not take us out of the war like Kucinich or a Green Party candidate but the reality is the country as a whole is not ready for such a change. Compared to such progressives perhaps one could argue that Obama, Clinton, and McCain are more of the same but given where we are as a country Obama (and Clinton) are a world away from McCain and may even prove to be the most progressive President we have had thus far. At least we are moving in the right direction and that's got to count.

[astroman12349384]

Then... VOTE FOR RON PAUL.

[armadilloze]

Vote Rupaul! Repeal the 14th Amendment! And all the other civil rights provisions too! White state governors and legislators know where you should sit on a bus or eat lunch, NOT the individual American citizen! GO RP!

[orszaghaz]

not change... rEVOLution!

[armadilloze]

Right! Segregation needs to be reinstated through a return to states' rights and dividing people into "groups" by race! State government knows what's best for you, not you yourself. Individual liberties are BAD BAD BAD!

[FabalaFae32]

Ok.

1. There is not a "civil war" in Darfur, there is a GENOCIDE. There's a difference.

2. There's no way sending troops to Darfur would be of the same magnitude as the Iraq war. With Obama's take on the Darfur issue, I'm sure the troops would be there to supply the force UN troops often can't supply because of idiotic mandates- as happened in Rwanda. And the oil in Darfur is owned by China, a country I'm sure America doesn't want to get into a conflict with. We wouldn't be able to function.

[VinceP1974]

What you and Obama dont understand is that any US troops in Sudan in order to end the Islamic Jihad against black Muslims and Non-Muslims in Darfur will be seen by the very same people that have you panicking about Iraq as an occupation of Muslim land. Only this time, our troops would be in a hard to reach no mans land, meanwhile Iraq will turn into Sudan due to Obama and you'll be screaming about the Genocide there. Democrats are so good at blaming the past yet never learn from it.

[FabalaFae32]

Thanks to Bush, Iraq is heading down the road to genocide (though based on religion rather than ethnicity) and is already at allout civil war. The difference here would be that Obama would, I'm sure, do his research before committing troops anywhere (i.e. know that there is more than one sect of Islam, unlike your dear Bush). And this will be to stop a genocide, rather than practically create one. People in refugee camps WANT help.

[VinceP1974]

"Stopping" the Genocide means putting an end to the Islamic Government of Sudan and their Jihadist tribal warrior. You folks make no sense. You want to create a genocide in Iraq because you're afraid of Jihadists and then you want to invade Sudan to stop Genocide attacks by Jihadists there.

Bush could have made a million mistakes... but those are past. We're talking about the future...do you actually learn anythign or not? All Dems do is blame blame blame.. but have no ideas about future.

[FabalaFae32]

Read that again. It made no sense whatsoever. How do Democrats want a genocide in Iraq, again? I recall us being AGAINST that whole debacle. And even if we did, which we don't "you're afraid of jihadists so you want to stop them."

yes. And? you seem to be trying to accuse us of being consistent.

[VinceP1974]

I know it's hard to grasp the concept that removing US forces from Iraq will result in some pretty nasty consequences, but really.. please try. And it's totally irrelevent who was for what and was against what in the past. The situation is what it is. I know you guys are so invested in pointing fingers, but please join us in 2008 in the current situation. And besides Dems were not agaisnt the war. they voted for it. they only betrayed the troops when they thought it would be good politcs.

[FabalaFae32]

1. Oh yeah- we were the ones who understood that concept from the beginning. Not Hillary, perhaps, but...enh, well. And the reason rational people supported the war at the beginning (though I never did) was that Bush told everyone Saddam had WMD. He did not. Many Democrats knew that if we went into Iraq, we would not be able to get out. People told the president, 'Hey, go ahead and go to war if you must, but please just read this about the dynamic there' He didn't. And that betrayed the troops.

[VinceP1974]

True to form. blame blame blame. not only that.. you distort the record. How many reasons would you say there were for the invasion?

[FabalaFae32]

It's not the reasons there were, it's the reasons Bush gave. He lied nearly a thousand times to get us into that war. al-Qaeda had a very limited presence in Iraq before we came in- it was a secular state.

Again, Bush lied nearly 1,000 times about a war that's killed 4,000 soldiers and who knows how many Iraqi civilians. Who's distorting the record? Sounds like Bush, changing his "reason" for invading every other day.

If you must invade other countries on weak evidence, at least have a plan.

[VinceP1974]

I asked you that question for a reason. You obviously have no idea what the reason for the war was. There were over 20.

Go back to your kindergarten and play your blame game with an age appropiate group of people.

[FabalaFae32]

The main reason, the reason that provided the impetus for starting the war, was WMD. Without that reason Bush would not have gotten congressional approval for the war, which is why I focus on that.

Other reasons, like deposing Saddam, were perhaps more noble, but with the absolute lack of planning, Iraqis now get to fear insurgents and the US military, who detains people who they think might have some vague insurgent connection indefinitely.

Hooray for us.

[verycoldice2]

HAHA AND IT WAS A REAL COMMERCIAL

[anishsuthar]

NO THIRD TERM FOR BUSH,

[richardbolin]

end the evil doer's dasterly deeds join the last union today!

[gangreneday]

Too bad the democrats are as bad as McCain. The tax cuts were the only minute little thing the bush clan did right and McCain voted against them originally. He's just a liar.

[BoydBoy189]

GOP - the party of dumb hicks!

[gangreneday]

don't worry, as you've demonstrated, the democrats can still get that "idgit" vote.

[jvent68]

It looks like the Multi-Headed Beast from Revelations, Chapter 7

[EasyEs]

Wait we can vote for bush again by Voting for Maverick. Sweet!

[CPAsheldon]

Two great guys! Two great leaders! But there is one better. Click on my name and see my site!

[nan3663]

America we are in big trouble, our Constitution is being raped right in front of us, the Republicans are the party of nasty old men who have nothing left to stand for, their debates where about which candidate could be the most despecable, but, to be honest our candidates, our Bush with Botox, and a rock star, both our corporate toadies, don't think there will be any big difference, when it cames to helping out the middle class, but, they are still better than the Bush thugs WE loved you America

[RonPaulGeorgeRingo]

McCain's convention speech (transcript):

My friends, my 9/11 Reagan flag waving deficit party hides behind the 9/11 flag while we fear fear spend us all into Reagan oblivion.

So in closing, thank you my debt loving credit card flag waving kool-aid friends and God Bless half of America for falling for this garbage (again . . . and again).

[HHCCKKIIEE123]

omg this is dumb

[inkyfuzzbottom]

Priceless!  We need more ads like this.

[jmmundy]

Wow! I feel much better about having McCain as the nominee now!

Thank you DNC -- you've given this Republican a reason to smile....

[wall171717]

Yay! Pass the koolaid!

[nan3663]

Turn off fox, its not funny anymore, there is to much at stake, the very soul of this nation! To not be informed is morally reprehensible, you probably don't read, if you want endless war and no liberty's, keep watching American idiot, and Big Oil, Big War, and Big Israel, will win, and they will bankrupt the USA.

Bush lied and millions of innocent have dead, I feel sorry for you, but, your thinking, or lack of thinking, is hurting our nation and the world, but, you are to far gone. ZZZZzzzzz

[axnyslie]

Those two need to get a room...in Gitmo

[katsat]

All the Democrats have to do is keep running over and over and over again that infamous photo of McCain pathetically bear-hugging Bush. His POW bravery or his so-called "maverick" image is eclipsed every time. That photo says it all.

[jlucks123]

That wasn't his argument. His argument was that the Bush spending budget - discretionary, non-defense domestic expenditures particularly - was far too profligate, and that the tax cuts would make the government totally fiscally insolvent. He was right on that. It remains to be seen how effective he'll be on correcting the Bush deficit. But to imply his position is hypocritical or "flip-floppy" is simplistic. No, make that stupid.

[bluegreenmonkey]

To think he used to be called a maverick!

At the time of the invasion of Iraq he said it was obscene to give big tax breaks to the wealthy in a time of war.

Now he wants to make Bush's tax cuts permanent. What a sad little old man.

[azndndude]

It is very pathetic the way McCain whores himself. I cannot believe I actually kind of supported the idiot. I am from Arizona as well. What an embarrassment. GO OBAMA!

[TPAUSA]

Bwahahaaaaaaaa!!! Sweet!! Poor Mr Magoo!!;)

[Andromedadrain]

To see McCain suck so much Bush ass after Bush tried to destroy him during the Republic(sic) primaries is simply nauseating.

Mccain has no true principles or honor. He's simply a political whore who supplicates himself like an abused junkyard dog who licks the hand that beats him. Arf-arf-whimper-wimper-lick-li­ck....

[Scriptease123]

So true! Although I'm a Democrat, McCain was one of the GOP that I felt was worthy of respect when he ran in 2000. He shouldn't be even shaking Bush's hand, much less hugging him after what they did to him. Now he's just another toady, parroting the Neocon agenda.

[yt5454]

McCain is even backing down from his anti-torture position, trying to ingratiate himself to the Coulter wing.

"WHORE" is the perfect word to describe him.

[bethany77dm]

LOL