McCain wimps out on CNN interview
September 2nd, 2008 at 07:09pm Pat Cunningham
Remember Campbell Brown’s total emasculation of McCain mouthpiece Tucker Bounds, which I SHOWED YOU this morning?
Well, golly, the thing got Mr. Straight Talk so UNNERVED that he’s cancelled a scheduled interview tonight on CNN. And he only would have had to face lob-pitcher Larry King.
Maybe he can get Sarah Palin to pinch-hit. She probably wouldn’t be so afraid.
UPDATE: I forgot. They’re keeping Palin UNDER WRAPS.
Entry Filed under: Larry King, Tucker Bounds, Campbell Brown, Sarah Palin, John McCain
13 Comments Add your own
1. Ward | September 2nd, 2008 at 8:21 pm
All Campbell Brown did was show the hypocrisy of the left and its ability to cope with a VP choice that represents real reform and feminism realized.
2. Menlo Bob | September 2nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Hey, hey, hey–stop that. Everyone knows what you refer to when you connect the words wimp and CNN. Anderson Cooper doesn’t deserve that
slightslapstuff.3. Pat Cunningham | September 2nd, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Ward: Feminism realized? That’s funny. Why, pray tell, is Palin going over so poorly among women? Here are the polls:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/greg-mitchell/2-new-polls-palin-pick-no_b_123019.html
Now, here’s where you tell me that the polls are rigged by liberals, or they’re not talking to the right people, or things will change or something like that.
Feminism realized. That’s rich.
4. Paul | September 3rd, 2008 at 8:58 am
It goes back to the old adage - don’t get in a peeing contest with a skunk.
5. gowader | September 3rd, 2008 at 9:38 am
Hey Pat! Do you really want to know why feminists do not like Palin? Because most feminists are either lesbians or power hungry ladder climbers.
Don’t compare the feminists to real women. There are real women who have children and stay home to raise them. Real women dedicate themselves to their husbands and families. Real women do not always have to make political statements out of their lifestyles.
Besides ,who gives a crap what the feminists think? Their girl Hillary did not make the cut anyway!
6. Ward | September 3rd, 2008 at 9:42 am
Thanks for citing the Huffington Post, a beacon of objective journalism. I am glad that there are women that aren’t fooled by McCain’s attempt to win the female vote with the selection of a female VP. He is. Whether he will be successful is yet to be seen.
If the goal of “feminism” is to empower women and create equality among the sexes, I think selecting a woman with more executive experience than the otherside’s entire ticket to be Vice President of the U.S.A is feminism realized.
However, if protecting a woman’s right to end her baby’s life is an inextricable part of feminism, and one cannot be, as Gov. Palin is, a Feminist For Life, then I agree with you feminism has not been realized by her selection.
While a majority of women in this country may not have been fooled by McCain’s rather obvious motive, I am of the opinion that they appear, based on your poll, to be fooled by a Democratic party that passed–twice–on their most qualified candidate (a woman).
7. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 11:04 am
gowader: Funny stuff. You’ve outdone yourself.
8. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 11:14 am
Paul: I’m gonna tell Larry King that you called him a skunk. He’s gonna be P.O.’d.
9. snuss | September 3rd, 2008 at 12:43 pm
I notice you didn’t mention Obama’s failure to appear on The O’Reilly Factor, after promising Bill that he would. If Barack can’t face the Fox News Channel, what chance does he have against Putin, or other U.S. adversaries? Or is that “beyond his pay grade”?
10. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 12:49 pm
snuss: It’s my understanding that Obama will appear on the O’Reilly program tomorrow night. Has that changed?
11. snuss | September 3rd, 2008 at 12:55 pm
I haven’t seen that being scheduled. If so, it’s long past time. He must figure that since the nomination is over, it is safe to face questions from someone who isn’t drooling in adoration from his mere presence.
12. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
O’Reilly’s not a drooler? Since when? His sexual peccadilloes would suggest otherwise. See here: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/1013043mackris1.html
13. Pat Cunningham | September 3rd, 2008 at 5:30 pm
snuss: You’re way, way, way over the line with that comment. We’ll have no more of that kind of stuff from you or anybody else. No, on second thought, your comment is coming down now, but I’ll leave my comment up so that others can try to imagine the kind of filth in which you indulge.
Leave a Comment
Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Trackback this post | Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed