This in-depth piece details how the McCain image differs from his actions on a wide variety of issues. With lots of back-up and good research, it reads well, plus comes across as authoritative and knowledgeable. While he barely touches on the reasons the press has such a love affair with McCain, that's more than I've read in a lot of stories. However, he certainly does an effective job of exposing the real John McCain.

Excellently researched, well written article which makes the point that no election is won by making McCain, Bush take-three. But if you want a straight-talking maverick who’s neither straight-talking nor a maverick, a flip-flopper on public financing and immigration, has deep long-term connections with lobbyists, is associated with evangelists Paisley and Hagee, opposed to abortion rights, but supports making tax giveaways permanent, is against regulation of businesses and special interests, opposes universal health care–even for children, wants to privatize social security, and is watery about radical conservatives’ plans to crucify Obama, then McCain is your man.

A good rundown of the case against McCain. If Momberg doesn't parrot the line about formerly straight-talking McCain changing over the years, it's because he looks at what McCain did and how he voted, not simply what he said. As he points out, "McCain’s strength stems from his media-fostered image as a straight-talking maverick reformer and former POW," but doesn't add that the info about the POW years is almost exclusively provided by McC himself. Interesting comments on Obama's need to come up with a positive platform conclude a good piece.

The article provides some details on McCain policies that are contrary to the positions most Americans support. Potential move by independent political message organizations is discussed.

Quite a good article that spotlights some of the critical differences between a McCain presidency and an Obama one.

The headline is very biased.

The author of this opinion piece gives away his bias when he calls McCain a "neoconservative", which everyone knows is nonesense. McCain's record is distorted in numerous places. The ideology driving this piece is evident when the author uses the code phrase "Bush's tax cuts for the rich", when they were tax rate cuts. The rich ended up with a substantial tax INCREASE. The sources quoted are from the far left and far right, and not mainstream or well informed. No Michael Barones are evident.

I moved to Arizona five years before McCain came bopping along. I have no idea where he lived before, but his moving to Arizona was for political reasons and to marry a rich heiress. A compedium of stories about him in the Arizona papers, especially the Republic, over the years since then swould be interesting. Back in the early 70s Arizona did have some pretty good Democrats in the US House and Senate. Arizona once even voted for Jesse Jackson when he was running for president. McCain is the phoniest Republican in the entire sleazy political game. He's worse than thugs like Reagan and Bush and Nixon, et al, because he pretends to be different and he's basically the same old, same old piece of nastiness. Why are all Republican ... More »