Excuse me ? New policy- No questions allowed! Just listen to the stump speech and STFU

"Maybe some enterprising reporter on the trail with McCain can ask him."

This is what everyone who's getting their panties in a know are forgetting: McCain has gone 4 weeks without holding a press conference. With his newfound love of pep rallies, he's not holding townhalls. So for weeks, he hasn't taken tough questions.

Say what you will about the BBQ media, I'm willing to bet that the reporters on the McCain trail aren't happy. The McCain campaign can't keep both candidates cloistered much longer. The press -- and voters -- will start to ask questions.

I think that the new activity in Pakistan are an effort to catch Osama Bin Ladin and give McCain an "October Surprise" present.

See, this is what being a MAVERICK is all about. Mavericks don't answer questions. Mavericks soften up a room full of reporters by firing off a few rounds before they enter it. Mavericks don't give a shit what Bush is doing.

But remember, Mavericks have a softer side, too. For instance, if you call a maverick a pig, you will hurt their soft mavericky feelings.

Also, mavericks tell a shitload of lies.

doncoop: I think that the new activity in Pakistan are an effort to catch Osama Bin Ladin and give McCain an "October Surprise" present.

Your comment gave me chills. OBL is their ace in the hole come election time. I'm no conspiracy nut, but it's precisely the sort of shit the Republicans are capable of. Especially when you consider, you know, history.

I have to go with doncoop on this one. The only thing I'd add is that this really smells of desperation. Given the way the whole thing was handled I can't see any reason it couldn't have been done a year ago, when the Pakistani government was more stable, rather than now. And in circumstances such as these I think the Bush administration is likely to be even more incompetent than it usually is.

chrenson,

Thanks for the morning laugh. You should get that definition into Wikionary.

I think the most likely response from McCain will be to simply change his policy -- without acknowledging the change -- and pretend that he's been in support of such covert operations within Pakistan all along. Then, he'll attack Obama for opposing it (even though he didn't) and for "not supporting our troops."

There is an article about the tribal areas in Pakistan in Sunday's Times Magazine:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07pakistan-t.html?ref=magazine

Once you read the article you wonder what has taken them so long to do this.

I suspect that it is more of Bush trying to polish his image before the end of his term than anything else. If they do capture Osama Bin Laden and John McCain benefits from this, all the better from a Republican standpoint.

John McCain will probably be lying low now that his running mate has gone home. There will be small and lightly enthusiastic crowds without her. He will have plenty of time to answer questions though. Maybe someone in the audience will want to know the answers to these questions.

Mavericks do reality, welcome questions, and stick to their principles (even if they're wildly unpopular). It's called "Honor."

McMavericks do barbecue, punish questions, and abandon principles every time they see their shadow. It's called "the inability to define Honor."

Guess which one John McMaveri ... uh, McCain is

obama ahead of the curve, as on afghanistan.

I'd rather NOT have publicity about a McCain/Bush disagreement. Their 90-95% agreement rate is one of the best arguments for independents to choose Obama.

He does not need the adoration of the press or the media now that he has a McBimbo on his side.

I'd rather NOT have publicity about a McCain/Bush disagreement.

i don't believe there is a disagreement here. you think mcWar is gonna repudiate bush for going after terraists?

Steve these are latest from Quinn:

Qunnipiac polls

Florida: McCain 50%, Obama 43%

Ohio: Obama 49%, McCain 44%

Pennsylvania: Obama 48%, McCain 45%

If that Ohio poll is true Mccain is in serious trouble...Obama has work to do in PA and Florida it seems..especially Fla....but good overall that Ohio poll should ease some of the ledge jumpers...

McCain recently suggested to CNN's Larry King that he, as president, wouldn't even pursue Osama bin Laden if he slipped past the border because "Pakistan is a sovereign nation."

So much for the "Gates of Hell..."

Are there enterprising reporters on McQueeg's trail? I haven't seen anything but softballs... no, beachballs thrown his way.

My score card has Obama on the right side of national security matters 9 times out of 12, and McQueeg 4 for 12.

doncoop: I think that the new activity in Pakistan are an effort to catch Osama Bin Ladin and give McCain an "October Surprise" present.

That's why at every opportunity Obama should inoculate himself and say that he is hoping that Bush can announce "today" that we have captured or killed Osama bin Laden, since Bush is now following Obama's policy recommendations.

I agree that the Bush move into Pakistan is almost identical to Sen. Obama's stated position.

So while I'm certainly interested to see if Sen. McCain says anything about it one way or the other, I'd also be interested to see if Sen. Obama makes a public statement in support of it.

And since Sen. McCain has become the unaccessible candidate, I wonder if Sen. Obama is regretting his decision not to have scores of town hall meetings. Those would be interesting!

at least president bush said "you're either with us or against us"...obama essentially says "you don't matter"

the problem with obama's statement was the he made it IN PUBLIC in front of millions of people. his policy implies he doesn't care about the public opinion of the pakistani people and thus the impact of that opinion on the pakistani government.

note that this bush order was 'secret' and 'classified' before the NYT decided to unclassify them. to have a presidential candidate publically state that he doesn't have many misgivings about launching attacks in an ally's sovereign territory may not be the best way to win over allies.

By all means, let's have "secret plans" to implement after the election. That worked out so well with Nixon.

nitish, mcCain is in a bind cause he, like bush, like you i imagine, were part of the cult of musharraf. obama distanced himself from pervez all through the campaign, making him (obama) a better ally for the new pakistani government. mcCain now will either:

a) support bush's move, confirming his obama-following (see afghanistan);
b) repudiate bush's move, making him look like a pussy;
or
c) hide behind mooselini's skirts some more.

of course there's no reason he won't do all of the above.

'Bout time.

IRAQ IS NOT OUR ENEMY.

THE TALIBAN DID NOT ATTACK US.

Maybe some enterprising reporter on the trail with McCain can ask him.

C'mon, Steve, that would require that the straight talkin' maverick actually be available for reporters' questions. The Straight Talk Express isn't functional above 30,000 feet.

Maybe some enterprising reporter on the trail with McCain can ask him.

And maybe I could get a date with Claudia Schiffer.

Indeed, now that Bush has given the green light to U.S. Special Operations forces conducting ground operations on Pakistani soil, McCain, if he's consistent,

Weathervane McCain? Consistent? The only thing that pimp is consistent about is the pursuit of cheap publicity.

considers the current U.S. policy as an "invasion" of an "ally."

Yes, I eagerly await McCain's statement that "We are all Pakistanis now."

Agreed on the october surprise. Still, it is amazing that Barack is coming up on the right side of history on so many foreign policy issues. The only one he missed was the surge and no one could have predicted that confluene of events. Can't we turn this into a good add. Right side of History, etc.

benjoya, you imagine incorrectly....since pakistan including lotsa Musharraf buddies sent over lotsa people to kill lotsa people in my native india, i am NOT a member of this 'cult of musharraf' you joke about.

if it were up to me, i'd say--to invoke a leading light of the lefty blogosphere--screw them, but my words and actions don't really have geopolitical ramifications.

again, obama supporters fail to see the fundamental problem with obama's PUBLICALLY stated policy of his utter disregard his actions--and the impact of those actions--would have on a supposed ALLY. an historically unstable country like pakistan doesn't need one of its supposed allies contributing to that instability.

it's a bit of a pattern for obama, regularly reserving such harsh rhetoric for allies like mexico and canada ('hammer') . [don't worry, it took him only 4 months to realize this rhetoric was a bit much]

there is a difference between public actions and behind the scenes actions. for example, while the US only recently dropped libya from the state sponsor of terror list, there were behind the scenes actions which led to more normalized relations. bush and blair didn't exactly go out on a megaphone and announce their plans. the diplomats kept their heads down and got the work done, mostly outta sight.

considering obama always talks about improving international relations, he demonstrates a basic failure to understand international relations: you don't anger allies.
[as a 'prebuttal', while i may have found rummy's "old europe" quip funny, i knew it wasn't constructive]

[i slightly edited this post to get past the comment gatekeepers]

benjoya, you imagine incorrectly....since pakistan including lotsa Musharraf buddies sent over lotsa people to kill lotsa people in my native india, i am NOT a member of this 'cult of musharraf'.

i'm not a big fan of pakistan so i'd say 'kill the baddies where they live', but my words and actions don't really have geopolitical ramifications.

again, obama supporters fail to see the fundamental problem with obama's PUBLICALLY stated policy of his utter disregard his actions--and the impact of those actions--would have on a supposed ALLY. an historically unstable country like pakistan doesn't need one of its supposed allies contributing to that instability.

it's a bit of a pattern for obama, regularly reserving such harsh rhetoric for allies like mexico and canada ('hammer') . [don't worry, it took him only 4 months to realize this rhetoric was a bit much]

there is a difference between public actions and behind the scenes actions. for example, while the US only recently dropped libya from the state sponsor of terror list, there were behind the scenes actions which led to more normalized relations. bush and blair didn't exactly go out on a megaphone and announce their plans. the diplomats kept their heads down and got the work done, mostly outta sight.

considering obama always talks about improving international relations, he demonstrates a basic failure to understand international relations: you don't anger allies.
[as a 'prebuttal', while i may have found rummy's "old europe" quip funny, i knew it wasn't constructive]

test post...to see if i have been banned a coupla days ago...
because my response to being lumped into some 'cult of musharraf' wasn't posted