I love the liberal portrayal of John MCCain’s invitation to skip Friday’s debate to be able to focus on one of the most historic decisions ever in the history of this country. The idea that McCain is playing politics or that he is purposely avoiding a debate is the rumor circulating tonight.
Obama is declining McCain’s offer. Which isn’t hard to believe since he’s declined offers before, such as the many old-fashioned townhall debates McCain begged Obama to do with him. Perhaps Obama needed to study foreign policy as hard as liberals are accusing Sarah Palin of right now before he actually faced McCain in a debate? Well, apparently, Barack has all of his answeres memorized now.
The fact is McCain has the foreign policy experience.
The fact is McCain has challenged Obama to no-holds-barred debates and Obama has chickened out of each one! What were Obama’s reasons? Can one liberal answer that question?
But the one time a candidate does move to cancel a debate – in a move to extend a working hand across party lines – Obama supporters respond by playing politics.
The Associated Press is in on it, too. The article written by Beth Fouhy describes both positions of both candidates but manages to throw this unquoted, un-sourced perspective in:
McCain beat Obama to the punch with the first public statement. The surprise announcement was an attempt to outmaneuver Obama on an issue McCain trails on and as the Democrat gains in the polls. McCain went before TV cameras minutes after they spoke and before the campaigns could hammer out the agreed-upon joint statement.
WHAT!? So this is a politcal move to “outmaneuver” Obama? I thought it was just an invitation to work together?
It’s clear; as evidenced by this article, and every liberal in the country tonight, that Democrats are not interested in bi-partisan work for the better of Americans.
Mel or anyone else, I am currently searching for the e-mail address of Beth Fouhy as well as the other authors that contributed to the article listed in the bottom. I cannot seem to find one on her, but in googling her name have found her active in Hillary’s campaign. Not quite certain how deep she was involved, so I cannot lie blame. But this type of “reporting” is precisely what liberals accuse Fox of all the time.
She and all “contributors” need to answer why that was necessary in the article.