Posted on 08/26/2018 9:05:52 AM PDT by ek_hornbeck
John McCain once took on Hillary Clinton in a drinking contest. It was at a restaurant in Estonia in 2004, during a congressional tour. Both politicians managed four shots of vodka; the rules were unclear, but Hillary -- McCain's one-time political rival -- was declared the winner, according to the restaurant proprietor (though in her own account, Clinton said they "agreed to withdraw in honorable fashion," rather than name a winner).
That image sums up the humanity and character of the late Senator McCain, who will be mourned deeply on both sides of the political aisle. He embodied a more moderate brand of conservatism -- one that could separate politics and friendship -- that now feels distant and very much missed.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
More than drinking buddies.
Apparently it's hard to detect on your breath, so you can take a shot at work and your coworkers won't be the wiser.
If so, I can see why they both are so good at it...
It sure does. And it stinks.
Love those pics, she hasn’t quit drinkin either.
I said many times during the campaign he was pimping for obamy. Some FReepers refused to believe. I knew it the minute he said we didn’t have to be afraid of the Kenyan.
“Do you know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly?” he (McCain) told a handful of big Republican funders. “Because Janet Reno is her father.” https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2008/sep/02/women.johnmccain
Oddly enough I think there is a case to be made for the idea that John McCain's finest contribution to America may prove to be his 2008 loss to Barack Obama.
That loss probably saved us from a Hillary Clinton Presidency and laid the groundwork for the Trump presidency.
McCain's support in 2008 among Conservatives was lukewarm and it is only Sarah Palin's presence on the ticket that gave him any chance at all.
But after 4 years of a McCain presidency it's doubtful that even Sarah could have carried him to a second term.
If McCain had won in 2008 Hillary would have come roaring back in 2012.
Remember - in 2008 it was understood that she would be the democrat candidate.
But then Barack Obama swooped in out of nowhere and stole the prize right out of her hands.
Had Obama gone on to lose to McCain she would have been the 2012 nominee even if democrats had to Arkancide every other candidate for the nomination.
On the other hand, Hillary would have been 4 years younger and a little more fit than in 2016, she wouldn't have had the history of her miserable failure as
Secretary of State, and she wouldn't have been hounded in the months before the election with her extensive record of criminal activity as Secretary of State
and later, as candidate for the democrat nomination, ie: lost emails, smashed cel-phones, Uranium sales to Russia, election rigging, etc.
And she wouldn't have had to lug 8 years of the democrats miserable Obamunism on her back like a Crack Monkey.
And it is that miserable 8 years of Obamunism and democrat criminality that fired up conservatives in 2016 and carried Donald Trump into the presidency.
But 4 years of a McCain presidency would have had the opposite effect and in a 2012 McCain-Hillary contest she would probably have whipped McCain soundly.
Oddly enough I think there is a case to be made for the idea that John McCain's finest contribution to America may prove to be his 2008 loss to Barack Obama.
That loss probably saved us from a Hillary Clinton Presidency and laid the groundwork for the Trump presidency.
McCain's support in 2008 among Conservatives was lukewarm and it is only Sarah Palin's presence on the ticket that gave him any chance at all.
But after 4 years of a McCain presidency it's doubtful that even Sarah could have carried him to a second term.
If McCain had won in 2008 Hillary would have come roaring back in 2012.
Remember - in 2008 it was understood that she would be the democrat candidate.
But then Barack Obama swooped in out of nowhere and stole the prize right out of her hands.
Had Obama gone on to lose to McCain she would have been the 2012 nominee even if democrats had to Arkancide every other candidate for the nomination.
On the other hand, Hillary would have been 4 years younger and a little more fit than in 2016, she wouldn't have had the history of her miserable failure as
Secretary of State, and she wouldn't have been hounded in the months before the election with her extensive record of criminal activity as Secretary of State
and later, as candidate for the democrat nomination, ie: lost emails, smashed cel-phones, Uranium sales to Russia, election rigging, etc.
And she wouldn't have had to lug 8 years of the democrats miserable Obamunism on her back like a Crack Monkey.
And it is that miserable 8 years of Obamunism and democrat criminality that fired up conservatives in 2016 and carried Donald Trump into the presidency.
But 4 years of a McCain presidency would have had the opposite effect and in a 2012 McCain-Hillary contest she would probably have whipped McCain soundly.
McCain was known to have connections to Russia for years. Read this story from 2008 and note many of the same names that are invoked to frame Trump: Glenn Simpson and Mary Jacoby, Paul Manafort, Oleg Deripaska, Putin, and others. McCain’s closest associates were up to their ears in peddling Russian interests.
https://www.thenation.com/article/mccains-kremlin-ties/
What an idiot. I used to live in England and the Brits routinely thought they knew all about American politics—with information and analysis about as shallow as this.
Embarrassing.
Friend to our enemies and enemy to our friends.
That said, may he find peace now after all the pain and suffering.
You can make fun of the Brits on that, but I will say that Americans' knowledge of foreign politics is even more pathetic.
That's just the mutual admiration and "knowing glance" of the Ruling Class. Or, as George Carlin put it - the "Big Club".
McCain was (and remained) every liberal’s favorite Republican except when he ran against Obama. Even then, the hostility towards him from the media was all a charade and he knew it, since the normally vindictive and petty McCain had hardly a bad word to say about Obama in 2008. They both knew that it was a game that they play to create the illusion of “choice”, because in the end they were on the same side with the same agenda.
It's not quite phony. Liberals know that McCain is the Republican they can count on to give them what they want most of the time. On immigration, McCain was on the same page as Chuck Schumer, and he was usually on the same foreign policy page as Bill and Hillary Clinton.
The worst part of it is that this is from one of CNN's token "conservatives" - Timothy Stanley (who's still preferable to their other token conservative never-Trumper, the obnoxious, insufferably shrill and self-righteous S.E. Cupp).
I was always wishing McCain a good response to the treatment, a long life, and an instantaneous retirement.
That said, the NYT will miss McCain.
I will not.
Well, Eamon de Valera (Prime Minister of Ireland) did just that, mainly to spite Winston Churchill.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-mco.s3.amazonaws.com/public/QNGQVULFONEVDMMLGAXNXTUZPA.jpg)