No crazier than anyone else who would run for President.

Crazy or power obsessed if you are running for the Dem ticket. – Lorica

Got this from Tammy Bruce’s site:

Last week his campaign staff allowed TIME to review those records–roughly 1,500 pages of them. The upshot: not only has McCain never displayed signs of a psychological disorder, but also in many cases his doctors’ reports read more glowingly about his mind than McCain’s best-selling autobiography. Wrote a doctor in 1974: “Patient is a very intelligent, ambitious, competitive, intellectually curious, caring person.” [...]

The most revealing reports are from the early years. In March 1973, two weeks after McCain’s release, a psychiatrist deems his “emotional status” to be “stable” and says McCain has an “overdeveloped superego,” or sense of conscience and morality, and an “unrealistically high” need for achievement…

Included in the records is a 1984 IQ test. His score, 133, would rank him among the most intelligent Presidents in history.

The last paragraph of the Time piece reads:

That McCain felt compelled to release all this information is testimony to two things: first, to the power of the whispered allegations against him; and, second, to McCain’s instinct for candor. At a holiday party last Friday night, McCain joked about how the moderators at last week’s debate seemed obsessed with his temper. “They kept asking, ‘Are you crazy? Are you crazy?’” Answer: No crazier than anyone else who would run for President.

–By James Carney/Washington

This piece was written on Dec 13th, 1999

(Governor Palin, not ST).

Notice anything? The speech is about as non-partisan and non-political as you can get. You won’t find one word of criticism for the Democrats in there. The only Dem she mentions is Hillary – and she says Hillary gets it right on Iran:

Senator Clinton understands the nature of this threat and what we must do to confront it. This is an issue that should unite all Americans.

So once again…the only ones using this event for a political showcase are the Democrats, who think a nutjob in Tehran with nuclear weapons will be less of an enemy than a hockey mom from Alaska.

It seemed to be doing just fine for the first 6 years of Bush’s presidency and then all of a sudden after the dems take over, it goes in the tank. Coincidence?!?!

Sorry, It’s still an active poll so I posted this again.

it could set race relations back 50 years

Does this mean that if Barry doesn’t win, that Black folk will be rioting all over America??? That seems a tad racist to me. – Lorica

The latest piece pushing the party line is in today’s Philadelphia Daily News: Philly Dems note discomfort over Obama among some white voters

The whining goes something like this:

“I’m hearing a lot of people saying, ‘He’s too young, he’s too inexperienced,’ ” said Philadelphia AFL-CIO President Pat Eiding. “What they’re really saying is, ‘He’s black.’ ”

So now young and inexperienced are code words for black! Uh huh.

But wait…there’s more:

Mark Sawyer, director of the Center for the Study of Race, Ethnicity and Politics at UCLA, told the Daily News that those casting racially motivated votes against Obama might cite his inexperience, or say he’s too arrogant, or too liberal.

So if you happen to take note that Obama is rated as the most liberal member of the Senate, that’s racist too. If you think he’s arrogant when he thumbs his nose at all of small-town America – you know, the bitter people who cling to their religion – then you can go get in line with the rest of the racists.

John Street, an African-American who won two mayoral races in Philadelphia, said that this election “has the great potential to help us come to grips with the issue of race in the USA, or it could set race relations back 50 years.”

Translation: if you don’t vote for Obama, you are personally setting race relations back 50 years.

No doubt…they’ll be hammering away at the “white guilt” theme for the next 6 weeks. Get used to this nonsense.