It's not what your pastor says - it's whether you sleep thru the sermon.

GTL was wondering aloud why McCain's paster - a raving loonie by all accounts - is getting a free pass because McCain sleeps through his sermons, just like Barack Obama probably does.

Moving on to the substance, having dismissed the story as the non-story it is and taking a swipe in passing of McCain's discomfort with the width of the loopholes in McCain-Fiengold, he gets to the point.

The Gun Toting Liberal™: "If you think for ONE MOMENT, “Panama John” lacks a “skeleton” or two in his closet, you’d better think AGAIN. The man’s been to war and he was captured as a POW. My hat’s off to him for that, and I sincerely do mean that. On the other hand, I’ve been to war, too, and I guaran-damned-TEE you — you do NOT want MOI to be YOUR “Leader Of The Free World”. I’ll never be the same again, and I wasn’t even captured and/or tortured by the enemy like “Panama John” was. God Bless him, but it is simply not POSSIBLE for the man to be even the slightest bit “normal”. Ask any other war veteran and unless they, like “The Sherrif”, are blinded by the G.O.P., they’ll wholeheartedly agree."

And that's the point I think we should all consider. I've been through my own sorts of wars - equivalent levels of stress, according to folks who tell other folks they need to be wrapped tighter - and I will tell you that PTSD really does do permanent damage.

This can be a blessing or a curse, but I cannot see any way where he could possibly turn it into a blessing for him and us in the Presidency. A Senator has the slack they need to cope. I'd be real tempted (from the viewpoint of either party) to have him as SecDef. It is going to be a chrome-plated bitch rebuilding our armed forces, and we will need someone with that level of street cred with the troops to do it. One thing about PTSD - it really does enhance your level of rational paranoia.

One thing I have noticed about presidential candidates - and this troubles me in general - there are few enough legislators who are competent enough to pour piss out of a boot; it disturbs me to see the good ones go down the crapper with the bad; the general outcome of a failed run for Presidency seems to be the end of one's political career.

Illustration Credit:

Pipe Down Now, Silly Liberal Shirt by Libertymaniacs

Customized (0ne might even go so far as to say "Perverted") By yours Truly.

But then, that's the beauty of the whole idea.

On Praising McCain with Fainter Damns...

A Litmus Test For Hard-Core Conservatives:

"Although it is not on the agenda and I suspect a goodly number of CPAC members would deny it, the biggest issue facing this crowd is whether to embrace McCain, who has been the subject of vitriolic attacks by Coulter, among other right-wing demagogues, over not being conservative enough.

As I have written early and often, as the presumptive nominee, McCain cannot win the November election without at least the tacit support of CPACers."

You know, I like to think of myself as a Conservative-ish sort of person - but apparently that particular C-Word has become as slimy, slippery and difficult to apply as that other Big Cee word (the one with the very same litmus tests, it seems); "Christian."

Now, there are ways in which I think McCain is far too willing to compromise Conservatism; but all my caviats have to do with intrusive big government and foreign warfare - aside from being more of a flip-flopper than Kerry ever was.

As far as I am concerned, it's the very antithesis of Conservatism to pee in a cup for ANYONE, much less kneel holding it before self-appointed arbiters of Conservatism, such as Coulter and Malkin to delicately taste.

The only proper response to such a request is to pee on their shoes. Getting elected at the price of the ability to do anything consistent with any identifiable set of values - much less personal honor or integrity - is a price no Real Conservative - or indeed, any person of conscience - will abide. Of course, this will not put you in a place of power - but if you HAD to sell your concience and your own freedom, you won't really be in a place of power. You will simply be a shill - and not even a well-paid shill by modern standards.

Coulter, for one, makes more money for far less effort than even George Bush gets by with.

As the contest comes down to sussing out which candidate of all presented on each side has the most ... erm ... flexibility; the most room for interpretation of intent in their rhetoric, the less interested I am in throwing away my vote by voting.

Increasingly, as the field narrows, excluding those with principle in favor of those with corporate support and not even particularly well-hidden sponsorships, I'm losing interest. Well, the only way to vote "none of the above" is to not vote at all. That is the only way to deny a plurality to everyone who participated.

As I'm on the topic of the meaningless of the duties of citizenship, let me advocate a constitutional amendment that would require that 25% of the affected population must vote with a minimum of 90% confidence in the accuracy of the tally for the election to be valid.

If elections fail three times - a constitutional convention is called and the federal government is put in abeyance.

Yeah, wishful thinking.

Bill O'Rielly to John McCain:

Bill O'Reilly: But do you understand what the New York Times wants, and the far-left want? They want to break down the white, Christian, male power structure, which you're a part, and so am I, and they want to bring in millions of foreign nationals to basically break down the structure that we have. In that regard, Pat Buchanan is right. So I say you've got to cap with a number.

Transcript courtesy Democrats.org

McCain failed completely to dissociate himself from this statement. I'm not much impressed by his attempt to duck O'Rielly's smug, cheesy racism.

John McCain: In America today we've got a very strong economy and low unemployment, so we need addition farm workers, including by the way agriculture, but there may come a time where we have an economic downturn, and we don't need so many.

[crosstalk]

O'Reilly: But in this bill, you guys have got to cap it. Because estimation is 12 million, there may be 20 [million]. You don't know, I don't know. We've got to cap it.

McCain: We do, we do. I agree with you.

Democrats.org highlights the "I agree with you," no doubt hoping ot imply that McCain agrees that it is iimportant to maintain the white Christian male power structure.

Me, I'm not sure that's a fair statement, but on the other hand, McCain failed to punch O'Rielly in the face for sleazing him by implication. So either he does agree, or he figures he can't afford to offend people who like Bill.

Now, I think he's tragically wrong on that. I don't think taking Bill to the woodshed, verbally or otherwise, could hurt ANYONE's election chances. And if he cut McCain's mike - now that would be pure electoral gold.

Bill O'Rielly, John McCain, Racism, 2008