Camp McCain: But, but, she didn't SAY he was ready to lead!

[General Zod]

Courtesy of your usual blubbering vaginas

(CNN) -- Sen. Hillary Clinton may have endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for president in a speech at the Democratic National Convention Tuesday night, but Sen. John McCain's campaign said she stopped short of saying that he is ready to lead the country.

"Sen. Clinton ran her presidential campaign making clear that Barack Obama is not prepared to lead as commander in chief. Nowhere tonight did she alter that assessment. Nowhere tonight did she say that Barack Obama is ready to lead," McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said in a statement.

"Millions of Hillary Clinton supporters and millions of Americans remain concerned about whether Barack Obama is ready to be president."

Clinton made clear in her speech that she did not want her supporters to vote for McCain even though the Arizona senator has made a concerted effort to reach out to Clinton backers.

"No way. No how. No McCain," Clinton said at the Democratic convention in Denver, Colorado. "Barack Obama is my candidate. And he must be our president." Video Watch Clinton's entire speech

She described McCain as her colleague and her friend but then laid into him.

"It makes sense that George Bush and John McCain will be together next week in the Twin Cities," she said, referring to next week's Republican National Convention. "Because these days, they're awfully hard to tell apart."

Republicans said the Twin Cities comment was effective because it played into the Democrats' efforts to cast McCain's policies as a continuation of the Bush administration.

"It's right along their theme of trying to put President Bush and John McCain together which, of course, John McCain has made such a point of being an independent," Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison told CNN's Larry King.

"That is one of the great things about him -- he really calls his own shots and he agrees when he really does and he's willing to disagree if he doesn't," Hutchison said.

"The Democratic party seems to be two Democratic parties, the party of Hillary Rodham Clinton and the party of Barack Obama," U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota told Larry King. "The main thing is the fact is Barack Obama hasn't put the party together yet and were looking at September 1."

But the McCain campaign said Clinton's speech validated many of their points about Obama's lack of experience.

"This was her time to make her case for Barack Obama," Bounds told Larry King. "It validated the argument that she made and that we're making ... Choose experience with John McCain or choose an inexperienced rookie to put in the White House."

The McCain campaign echoed sentiments expressed earlier Tuesday by two other Republicans who attacked Obama's fitness to run the country.

"He's a charming guy, he's a celebrity, but does he have the judgment and experience that comes from a life-long service in one sector or another?" former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney asked.

Romney was one of two high-profile Republicans who made cameos Tuesday night at the convention. Former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani -- who, like Romney, pursued a failed campaign for the Republican presidential nomination -- also appeared on CNN's Situation Room to discuss the viability of an Obama-Biden ticket.

Giuliani said Obama made a "big mistake" when he passed over Clinton, the most anticipated speaker at Tuesday night's Democratic convention, for Sen. Joe Biden as his vice presidential running mate.

"The normal political thing to do, in terms of the best decision to make to win, would've been to pick Hillary Clinton," Giuliani, former mayor of New York, told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on the floor of the convention.

"It is a no-brainer. She got 18 million votes. Joe got 9,000 votes," Giuliani said, referring to their showings in polls during their failed bids for the Democratic presidential ticket.

"She commands about 45, 48 percent of this convention." Video Watch Giuliani talk about Clinton

Giuliani, who is to make the keynote speech at the Republican National Convention in Minnesota next week, also emphasized the Illinois' senator's lack of experience.

"That's what the choice for a president comes down to. It doesn't come down to a choice between the abstract and the abstract; it comes down to a choice between two people," Giuliani said. "You can't avoid that comparison. You've got one [candidate] with a lot of experience and one with virtually no experience."

Giuliani and Romney pointed out that both Clinton and Biden attacked Obama for his lack of experience when they were running against him this year.

Democrats believe that the Obama camp chose Biden, known for his vociferous critiques of the Bush administration, to help fill perceived gaps in Obama's résumé with his foreign policy experience.

Romney playfully referred to Biden's reputation for being a sharp debater.

"Joe Biden is an impenetrable thicket of words," Romney said. "I can't imagine anybody who is ready to debate Joe Biden."
advertisement

Romney, whose name has been tossed around as a potential running mate for McCain, brushed aside questions about the Arizona senator's search for a vice president.

"I'm not sure when John McCain will make his vice president announcement or who it'll be," Romney said. "I have confidence in his instincts. He's proven time and time again that those instincts serve him well, and I think he'll make a wise choice."

The Republitards are really stretching on this one, but the sad thing is I can actually see this tactic working.

[The Guid]

In an alternate Universe Republicans are pointing out how the American people have so little confidence that Barak Obama is "ready to lead" that Hillary Clinton had to insist that he was! Never before has anyone ever had to assert that a President is ready to lead! And yet, she had to say it about Barak Obama. Methinks the lady doth protest too much!

[Big Phil]

There was a woman on NPR this morning who said the same thing.

Let's face it folks - anyone who votes for McCain's experience over Obama's inexperience and pays no attention to the issues just doesn't want to vote for an uppity nigger. Nevermind the past eight years and that McCain isn't proposing any substantial changes to how Bush mismanaged the company. The sad reality is that there are a lot of people who will vote this way.

The fact that Obama and McCain are tied when Bush has a 20% approval rating is concerning. Those 30% voting McCain can't possibly be voting in favor or more Bush policies, so they must be voting against the black guy.

[Pelranius]

There was a woman on NPR this morning who said the same thing.

Let's face it folks - anyone who votes for McCain's experience over Obama's inexperience and pays no attention to the issues just doesn't want to vote for an uppity nigger. Nevermind the past eight years and that McCain isn't proposing any substantial changes to how Bush mismanaged the company. The sad reality is that there are a lot of people who will vote this way.

The fact that Obama and McCain are tied when Bush has a 20% approval rating is concerning. Those 30% voting McCain can't possibly be voting in favor or more Bush policies, so they must be voting against the black guy.

Or they could just be imbecilic enough to buy the straight talk express bullshit. I've had perfectly sane liberal Democrat friends in college fall line sinker and hook for that shit last semester.

[Big Phil]

There was a woman on NPR this morning who said the same thing.

Let's face it folks - anyone who votes for McCain's experience over Obama's inexperience and pays no attention to the issues just doesn't want to vote for an uppity nigger. Nevermind the past eight years and that McCain isn't proposing any substantial changes to how Bush mismanaged the company. The sad reality is that there are a lot of people who will vote this way.

The fact that Obama and McCain are tied when Bush has a 20% approval rating is concerning. Those 30% voting McCain can't possibly be voting in favor or more Bush policies, so they must be voting against the black guy.

Or they could just be imbecilic enough to buy the straight talk express bullshit. I've had perfectly sane liberal Democrat friends in college fall line sinker and hook for that shit last semester.

In other words, they're paying no attention to the issues and voting based on skin color, personality, or some other fluffy reason.

There's nothing really wrong with voting based on personality, IF you don't really care about the issues. What shocks me are the people who plan to vote McCain despite not agreeing with him on a stunning number of important issues.

[General Zod]

There's nothing really wrong with voting based on personality, IF you don't really care about the issues. What shocks me are the people who plan to vote McCain despite not agreeing with him on a stunning number of important issues.

There's always some idiots out there who always vote along the party line, whether or not the candidates are good regardless of any of the aforementioned issues.

[Pelranius]

My friends cited experience and the POW issue. I used to think that way before reviewing his actions two years ago, upon which I realized that McSame's head was up the asses of the AEI and other neocon institutions. Fortunately they've changed their votes to Obama, so there is hope for the world yet.

[Darth Wong]

There's nothing really wrong with voting based on personality, IF you don't really care about the issues.

Ummm, why isn't there anything wrong with that? We should ideally be voting for candidates based on competence. Anyone who doesn't want to do that, or is too lazy to find out what kind of judgment the candidate has displayed in the past, shouldn't be voting at all.

What shocks me are the people who plan to vote McCain despite not agreeing with him on a stunning number of important issues.

People like that are just proving the stereotype of the dumbshit voter who treats national elections as if they're choosing a goddamned mascot.

[Big Phil]

There's nothing really wrong with voting based on personality, IF you don't really care about the issues.

Ummm, why isn't there anything wrong with that? We should ideally be voting for candidates based on competence. Anyone who doesn't want to do that, or is too lazy to find out what kind of judgment the candidate has displayed in the past, shouldn't be voting at all.

What shocks me are the people who plan to vote McCain despite not agreeing with him on a stunning number of important issues.

People like that are just proving the stereotype of the dumbshit voter who treats national elections as if they're choosing a goddamned mascot.

Isn't that what McCain is trying to do, show that he is competent (i.e., experienced) and Obama is not (i.e., celebrity with no experience)? I don't think you really want votes based on competence as much as on policy. It's important that the president not be mildly retarded like Shrub, but it's more important that he or she plan on instituting policies with which one agrees.

The former Clinton supporters who are (loudly stating they will be) voting against their interests and for McCain in the fall are the ones I don't get. Other examples are log cabin (gay) Republicans; what the fuck are they thinking?

[Big Phil]

As an aside, these are the idiots that make my head hurt:

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/ ... TE=DEFAULT

Clinton releases her delegates to vote for Obama
From Associated Press
August 27, 2008 3:16 PM EDT

DENVER - Less than an hour before the Democratic convention calls the roll of the states, Hillary Rodham Clinton began an emotional gathering with her delegates Wednesday by telling them she was releasing them as delegates to vote for Barack Obama. Many in the crowded ballroom yelled back "No!"

Clinton told her delegates she's not telling them what to do, adding: "You've come here from so many different places, having made this journey and feeling in your heart what is right for you to do."

Clinton told her loyal followers: "I want you to know that this has been a joy. Yes, we didn't make it. But, boy, did we have a good time."

Democrats were poised to formally deliver the party's presidential nomination to Barack Obama on Wednesday, making him the first black nominee of a major party. While the historic outcome was certain, suspense remained over how the vote of delegates would proceed, and for how long.

Obama planned a mid-afternoon arrival in the convention city after campaigning in Montana.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, presiding officer of the Democratic National Convention, predicted the roll-call voting after the names of both Obama and one-time rival Hillary Rodham Clinton were put in nomination would go "very smoothly."

"Are you ready for victory? Then you must be ready for unity. That is the only way we are going to win and have this victory," she told Iowa's convention delegates.

Many details remained unknown, however, including how many states would vote before somebody - probably Clinton herself - asked the delegates to give the nomination to Obama by acclamation.

Clinton, who made a ringing, unqualified endorsement of her former rival in a convention speech Tuesday night, met with her delegates in the afternoon. She won 18 million votes in primary-season contests but failed to earn her party's nomination.

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, who had been a Clinton supporter, suggested in an interview with The Associated Press that some delegates would vote for Clinton no matter what she said, and that any motion to move to an unanimous convention ballot would draw "a few no's."

Obama will give his acceptance speech on Thursday to as many as 75,000 people at Invesco Field at Mile High Stadium.

Then, on Friday, Obama, his wife Michelle and running mate Joe Biden and his wife Jill will embark on a three-day bus tour of battleground states Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan.

Rendell said that while polls suggested Obama was ahead in Pennsylvania, McCain was "not giving up at all" and "it's going to be a battle."

Biden was to address the convention Wednesday night, as was former President Clinton, whose support for Obama has seemed tepid at best. Earlier this month, for instance, the former president sidestepped a question on whether Obama was prepared for the White House. "You could argue that no one's ever ready to be president," Clinton told ABC News.

Representatives of the Clinton and Obama teams struck a deal setting ground rules for Wednesday's roll call vote that will hand the nomination to Obama but will also allow Clinton supporters to express their support for her.

Advisers to Clinton and Obama sent a joint letter to state delegation chairs instructing them to distribute vote tally sheets to delegates Wednesday and return them before the vote got under way.

The letter, first obtained Tuesday night by The Associated Press, said Clinton would have one nominating speech and two seconding speeches, followed by Obama's nominating speech and three seconding speeches - totaling no more than 15 minutes for each candidate. Then the roll call would begin, said the letter signed by Obama senior adviser Jeff Berman, Clinton senior adviser Craig Smith and convention secretary Alice Germond.

The roll call will continue until all votes are counted or the delegates give the nomination to Obama by acclamation.

Democratic officials close to Clinton said they planned to have someone - perhaps the senator herself - cut off the vote after a few states.

Kathleen Krehbiel, an Iowa delegate who had supported Clinton, credited the New York senator's convention speech for finally persuading her to cross the line and vote for Obama.

"My horse is out of the race. I'm getting out to work for Obama," Krehbiel said. But, she added, "I think there are a few delegates who need to vote for Hillary to reach that point of closure."

In a sign of unity, Obama adviser Berman and Clinton adviser Smith told delegates on Wednesday that they had been working out of the same office all week to ensure a smooth convention.

"The story is that we are working as a team," Berman said.

Anticipating Wednesday night's focus on national security at the convention, Republican John McCain contended in a new TV ad that Obama showed he was "dangerously unprepared" for the White House when he described Iran as a "tiny" nation that didn't pose a serious threat.

"Iran. Radical Islamic government. Known sponsors of terrorism. Developing nuclear capabilities to 'generate power' but threatening to eliminate Israel," says the ad, which was being run in key states. "Terrorism, destroying Israel - those aren't 'serious threats'"?

Missing from the ad was the context of Obama's remarks last May in which he compared Iran and other adversarial governments to the superpower Soviet Union. "They don't pose a serious threat to us the way the Soviet Union posed a threat to us," he said in arguing for talks with Iran. "You know, Iran, they spend one-100th of what we spend on the military. If Iran ever tried to pose a serious threat to us, they wouldn't stand a chance."

Bill Clinton in his speech was expected to criticize McCain and the Bush administration, particularly on the state of the U.S. economy.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.