Obama: McCain's "Better Than George Bush"

A central and until now uniting theme of Democratic campaigning against presumptive Republican nominee John McCain has been that a McCain presidency would be indistinguishable from that of George Bush -- or perhaps worse.

Barack Obama has challenged this premise.

Campaigning Sunday in Pennsylvania, just hours before Tuesday's critical primary, the Democratic presidential contender said, "You have a real choice in this election. Either Democrat would be better than John McCain. And all three of us would be better than George Bush."

Obama's rival for the Democratic nod begged to differ.

"We need a nominee who will take on John McCain, not cheer on John McCain," New York Senator Hillary Clinton told cheering supporters in Johnstown. "And I will be that nominee."

Who is right? Clinton, although not pleasantly so.

McCain may be better than Bush on a handful of domestic issues -- although he has scrambled to distance himself from many of his formerly sound stances in order to rally the support of conservative Republicans. On the fundamental question of war and peace, however, McCain is not just arguably but factually worse than Bush. As bad as the current president may be, he does not talk of occupying Iraq for 100 years -- at least not openly.

But it's not just Iraq. The "bomb, bomb, bomb... bomb Iran" candidate's general approach to foreign policy is more troubling than that of the current president.

By the same token, Clinton -- who got in trouble a while back for seeming to suggest that McCain was more experienced than Obama -- played her hand too wildly. Instead of simply saying, "The senator from Illinois and I disagree on this point, and that's why I'd be a better nominee," Clinton just had to accuse Obama of "(cheering) on John McCain."

There is no honest way to read Obama's comment as cheering on McCain. In fact, the best read is that the Illinoisan was being generous to Hillary Clinton -- displaying a dignity that his rival cannot seem to muster even when she has the facts on her side.

Comments (43)

1. Wasn't Hillary the last one to say McCain would be a good choice in order to take a shot at Obama?

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/20/2008 @ 11:35pm

2. Incredible! This coming from the same person who said, "I have a lifetime of experience. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience. Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2002."

   Posted by Billy_Budd at 04/20/2008 @ 11:56pm

3. McCain and Bush?

   As men?... no comparison.

   As politicians?... same backers, same voter base... but McCain is not in the PNAC club so far as I know... so that makes him 'potentially' better...

   My sense is... McCain's trying to be like GWB enough to carry the torch... but he won't 'bury the hatchet' until after the election.

   Guess I'll just have to agree with Obama on this one, John...

   Posted by ttr at 04/20/2008 @ 11:58pm

4. RE: Obama: McCain Is ...

   Ah Obama banana. How banal is it? That's comparable to Dubya in 2000 who said McCain's good man. Well, Mr. Obama, just stop saying the obvious, be more specific, especially on the part of your belief and religion.

   Posted by HelenDAO at 04/21/2008 @ 12:17am

5. Posted by TTR 04/20/2008 @ 11:58pm

   wow.

   it's like choosing between jell-o'n'ham salad and turnip pie.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/21/2008 @ 01:24am

6. Same ol' Billary. Say anything, do anything. So desperate. May the PA voters spare us more of this nonsense tomw, and end it for Billary. Send the pair back to Chappaqua.

   Posted by sloper at 04/21/2008 @ 01:43am

7. Posted by SLOPER 04/21/2008 @ 01:43am

   don't cross your fingers too tightly.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 04/21/2008 @ 01:47am

8. I am remembering back a while when our resident economist experts claimed the oil price was due strictly to supply and demand (not last year when the refineries went off line to raise prices, but this year), and I come across this gem (context: attacks on oil pipelines and a Japanese tanker causing the incestors to feel worried))

   Abdullah el al-Badri, secretary-general of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, said Sunday that oil prices would likely go higher and that the group was ready to raise production if the price pressure was due to a shortage of supply -- something he doubted.

   "Oil prices, there is a common understanding that has nothing to do with supply and demand," al-Badri said on the sidelines of an energy conference in Rome.

   Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 07:26am

9. Would McBain go to the House Saud and tell them to "Open the taps"?

   ahh, remember the pandering!

   humble foreign policy

   Uniter, not divider

   God this, God that

   Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 07:31am

10. it's like choosing between jell-o'n'ham salad and turnip pie.

    Posted by FROSTY ZOOM 04/21/2008 @ 01:24am |

    that is American presidential elections in a nutshell. But, Allah forbid one ever even looked at the hamburger over in the "3rd" party menu.

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 07:33am

11. When only the most flip-floppin flip flop will do---

    You want a McCain.

    Posted by MARKCANYON 04/21/2008 @ 05:09am

    If you want a jello-ham salad for president, you need the ham (made from....pork ...earmarked from the VA)

    http://www.luxist.com/2007/08/22/alba-quercus-reserve-worlds-most-expens ive-ham/

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 07:43am

12. Fresh out of his bath, Grover speaks to the hippy lie that McCain is the worst kind of politician, a flip-flopper

    http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/6/11/214905.shtml

    It's NEWSMAX, it must be good!

    " Drive Your Liberal Friends Crazy with the Bush Map! Click Here"- This is the map that shows the road to Jerusalem going through Baghdad, (also includes 2 Roadmaps to Peace, slightly used)

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 07:48am

13. McCain may well be better than Bush. That isn't saying much though. It's like saying only having one eye gouged out is better than both eyes being gouged out. Either way, you'll still get an eye gouged out.

    Posted by FritztheCat at 04/21/2008 @ 08:40am

14. Look, McCain IS ....MARGINALLY better than Bush. If he got elected, to hold onto his "McCain Coalition" of moderates and independents, he'd probably piss off the Hard Right every 4th Sunday....on stem-cells, affirmative action, global warming, even taxes.

    But he's still nothing more than "Bush-44" as far as the war and a host of OTHER issues....and not worth it.

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 08:44am

15. BTW...

    Here's the ad [youtube.com]!

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 09:00am

16. I can't believe (okay, I can) that she has the audacity to say that Obama won't take on McCain like she can, when she was the one praising McCain's experience and service and qualifications and even said that a race between her and John McCain would be incredibly positive because she has such great respect for him.

    She is such a hypocrite. And I'd argue McCain isn't quite as bad as Bush, which isn't saying much, but he is pretty close. I would have rather Obama not said that, but whatever, it isn't like it really matters. I think Hillary looks worse here for being such an opportunistic fake over the whole thing, as usual.

    Posted by bridoc at 04/21/2008 @ 09:12am

17. hey, crabs!

    they've got uss ronald reagan hoodies on clearance. 90% off.

    http://shop.newsmax.com/shop/index.cfm?page=products&categoryid=10

    Posted by frosty zoom at 04/21/2008 @ 09:17am

18. JOHN NICHOLS, Your article is merely designed to maintain that illusion that McCain would be indistinguishable from Bush. Obama was merely being a little objective, something rarely seen anymore. You are being transparently partisan, and since you still recoil wimp-like at the Bomb Bomb Bomb Bombbomb Iran joke, I sentence you to two weeks in a cell with continuous FAMILY GUY reruns played on an knobless television.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/21/2008 @ 09:59am

19. McCain as commander in Chief is one of the scariest scenarios possible. He is rash, arrogant, stubborn, and unjustifiably confident...good front line characteristics, but certainly not good Commander in Chief Characteristics.

    Plus I don't want to hear any of this war hero business...Common peope, think for yourselves for a bit and do your research instead of just going along with manufactured hype. Just ask yourself, what the heck did McCain do to be a war hero? He was shot down, provided US military information to his captors to receive better medical care (self admitted), and was evetually released. Did he risk his life to save someone else's? Did he pull someone out of a burning tank? No. He is not a a war hero. He is a war survivor. Calling him a war hero is insulting to those who really performed acts of heroism, many of which are probably not even documented. It's insulting to current former POWs who are paractically forgotten by this country.

    Nevermind that two of his commanding officers admitted on record that they seriously doubted McCain's story that he was beaten by the North vietnamese since that didn't normally occur at the camp where he was being held.

    "Between the two of us, it's our belief, and to the best of our knowledge, that no prisoner was beaten or harmed physically in that camp [known as "The Plantation"]," Larson says. ". . . My only contention with the McCain deal is that while he was at The Plantation, to the best of my knowledge and Ted's knowledge, he was not physically abused in any way. No one was in that camp. It was the camp that people were released from."

    Given this information it is interesting that McCain asked vietnamese officials not to make public records of US POW interrogatons in 1993.

    Where are the democratic swift-boaters when you need them. McCain will be torn apart in the general election cause the "straight talk express" has often taken the scenic route.

    Some hero...

    Posted by danconstan at 04/21/2008 @ 10:11am

20. Posted by CHIP THORNTON 04/21/2008 @ 09:59am

    Okay, CHIP, what "distinguished" ways would YOU want McCain to be different from Bush?

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 10:13am

21. MASK

    I'd WANT him to be less stubborn than Bush. Not only does Bush dig in his heels once he makes a decision, but its been reported that Bush actually BELIEVES it wrong to change your mind. Considers it wishy-washy. I don't see that kind of obstinance in McCain.

    I don't see him taking things personally, like Bush, or losing focus on the objective like Bush, both reasons why we are in this mess overseas in the first place.

    Bush is one of those guys who looks at torture and oppression and war with the innocent, gullible eyes of one who has never experienced any of it.

    As far as issues are concerned, having a strong leader in the White House doesn't mean Neo-Con-like decisions right down the line: After all, what a president wants to do and what he can get past Congress are oftentimes two different things.

    I wanted to give you an answer Mask, but its all kind of academic, since I'm probably going to vote for Obama, for reasons to be left for another discussion. I just can't stand Nichols blatant subjectivism. You could make a living betting on what he'll say on an issue. Thats not real journalism.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/21/2008 @ 10:33am

22. DANCONSTAN,

    If you're going to refer to others as "common people" at least spell "people" correctly.

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/21/2008 @ 10:38am

23. Posted by CHIP THORNTON 04/21/2008 @ 10:33am

    "blatent subjectivism"?!??! Subjectivism is the belief that subjective experience is the main thing by which all should be measured. Not really sure how that relates to the idea that McCain for all basic purposes WOULD be George Bush on most policies...especially in comparison to any political opponent.

    As I noted, there would be a few differences, as McCain holds little loyalty to his Hard Right base (his rhetoric lately is mostly just to keep them in line, except on the war of course)...and would likely piss them off on various and sundry occasions.

    However given the major issues of the day...he'd essentially be "Bush-44" a continuation of Bush major policies.

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 11:10am

24. McCain is, arguably... the best candidate for the job of 'running for president with honor in the face of an overwhelming likelihood of defeat'... that the GOP could possibly muster. Who better to be shot down in an unwinnable contest... who else is 'man enough' to carry the GOP's torch from it's precarious predicament into the territory of decency... who better to soften the PR, and cushion the fall of this very unpopular president...

    Take a bow, John McCain... you are a true American patriot, and heroic to the core... I'm not kidding.

    However... John, please note the fine print at the bottom of our agreement... which clearly states that you shall not win the presidency...

    Posted by ttr at 04/21/2008 @ 12:01pm

25. Posted by TTR 04/21/2008 @ 12:01pm |

    The competing theories...

    1. McCain is "Bush-41 after Reagan"...not as pure, but 'good enough' and all that 'kindler, gentler stuff' is just talk. Problem with that of course is Reagan didn't leave GHW with a recession and quaqmire war.

    2. McCain is "Bob Dole-1996". It was "his turn"...and he's a war hero and moderate, but dull as dishwater and facing a "youthful opponent" and (A) a base that isn't that keen on him and therefore not enthuised to vote and (B) a public that is in no way inspired by him.

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 12:07pm

26. Posted by TTR 04/21/2008 @ 12:01pm

    I have to agree with you. He is not so much unlike Bush that it looks like the GOP is trying to change their tack too much but he is enough unlike him that he actually can put up a fight.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 12:41pm

27. It was supposed to be read as "Come on people" not "common" as in ordinary...

    Posted by danconstan at 04/21/2008 @ 1:05pm

28. Oh, sorry. I sit corrected :)

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/21/2008 @ 1:08pm

29. MASK

    Subjective as in partisan, as opposed to being OBjective.

    (Its what my teacher called it, weally it is :)

    Posted by CHIP THORNTON at 04/21/2008 @ 1:10pm

30. There is a strategy involved in this. He wouldnt have given him that kind of backhanded complement if he knew McCain is sending out letter tying him to Hamas. His strategy is to show that he is running an honorable campaign while McCain is demonizing him with this Hamas mailing. He gets to look like he is taking the high road. Dont be surprise if you see that Hamas mailing filter into the news.

    Carol

    Posted by harriscrl3 at 04/21/2008 @ 1:10pm

31. MARKCANYON says

    "Listen, you prick.

    If you've been in the Hanoi Hilton with two broken arms and a shattered leg that has received minimal medical care, while interrogated daily, and refuse repatriation, unless all your fellow prisoners are also released, then you can open your cocksucker mouth and talk about this war hero business. Until then you know where you can shove your lies and stupidities"

    Hmmm...kind of like what a discussion between McCain and Ahmadinejad would sound like right before McCain orders the first strike of another 100 year war - basically just a pointless ranting in moment of rage that says nothing. I guess birds of a feather flock together...lol! Thanks for giving us a glimpse of what McCain's diplomacy would look like.

    Posted by danconstan at 04/21/2008 @ 1:19pm

32. This feverish insistence on comparing him to Bush, against whom he is not running, is an admission, Obama and Hillary don't stand up against McCain.

    Posted by MARKCANYON 04/21/2008 @ 1:02pm

    Actually that's not what it mean at all. It means that like Republicans we play the dirty games too and the one thing most Americans don't want 70% in fact is another Bush. You compare a President to Bush now and he loses credibility it's just another tactic to throw him off. It doesn't at all mean they don't stand up. You like so many others for all your knowledge of political history are still good at making up "facts" to make your point.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 1:53pm

33. Posted by HARRISCRL3 04/21/2008 @ 1:10pm

    Same thing he is doing to Hillary he is going to do to McCain. The more dirty Hillary tried to make her politics the more Obama benefited. One of the major reasons Hillary is where she is now is because of the way she has conducted her campaign on the old method politics. Hopefully for his sake McCain learned that a lot of Americans don't like that anymore.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 1:56pm

34. Posted by DANCONSTAN 04/21/2008 @ 1:19pm

    He makes a good point Mark. Why is it someone who got shot down, according to his superiors apparently did not get tortured (That's news to me), and DID give information to the enemy that he then tried to cover up, why is that person a hero? The term hero like the term genius is thrown around way too much now-a-days. The only way I think you qualify as a is if you do something selfless to save the life or lives of another. For instance a fireman sitting in the middle of flames risking life and limb to try to pry a girl from inside a burning car while a fuel truck that's right next to it is more than likely about to explode (true story). I'm not saying McCain is a bad guy I am not saying what he did wasn't awesome but I don't think it qualifies him as a hero. As far as I am concerned he did his job. Knowing the risks he didn't go above and beyond in a selfless act he did what he was supposed to do and like an Alaskan fisherman who falls overboard and dies in the water the odds just were not with him.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 2:07pm

35. Posted by CHIP THORNTON 04/21/2008 @ 1:10pm

    CHIP...he's an OPINION writer. A political columnist.

    You expect "objectivity"!?!??!? You go after Bill Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and Fred Barnes for "blatent subjectivism"???

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 2:32pm

36. The Overall point is that McCain has done a lot in politics that directly contrasts the meaning of the word "hero" and hopefully some of that will come out in the general election. It's just that at this point he has done such a good job of convincing people that he is a "war hero" throughout his life that if anyone criticizes that aspect of his life they get attacked like in MARKCANYON's previous post. If he is going to bring his service record into the campign, then its open game.

    Posted by danconstan at 04/21/2008 @ 2:48pm

37. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/21/2008 @ 2:44pm

    That happened to my grandfather because a wheel barrow fell on his finger and sliced it off when he was building a house. Does that make him a hero? By the way the insult pulls away from your overall point you can easily reject what I am saying without using some fourth grade insult to try falsely elevate your intelligence. The point I was making was YES receiving minimal care sucks but people deal with that here often enough because they can't afford it BUT there is a big difference between being tortured (electric shocks, beatings, water torture etc.) than being interrogated while you have previous afflictions still flaring up.

    On a side point would you argue that if he got medical assistance and was made healthy BEFORE he was interrogated that he would then not have been a hero because he didn't suffer to give up information.

    " Was that inflicted on him because he spilled his guts?"

    Actually there are multiple quotes of HIM saying that he gave up information under their torture, whatever that meant.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 3:54pm

38. DANCON, maybe you're a newbie, but you MUST realize that...

    MARKCANYON is a neo-Nazi.

    No, no "Godwin's Law" invocation...he's an ACTUAL Holocaust-supporting, Jew-hating, pro-Hitler Nazi sympathizer.

    Posted by Mask at 04/21/2008 @ 4:21pm

39. Posted by MARKCANYON 04/21/2008 @ 4:21pm

    Well considering the left out number the right wouldn't THAT make it the real America and what is by definition the real America to you Mark?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 4:38pm

40. "endless harangue against the USA"?

    Or a harangue against the abuses suffered by blacks for a long time in the USA? Some imagined, most awful real.

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 4:51pm

41. Oh, I forget, the USA is what the right says it is. At this point in time the USA is George W. bush and ALL of his policies.

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/21/2008 @ 4:52pm

42. Posted by CRABWALK 04/21/2008 @ 4:51pm

    You make a good point. Everyone accuses him of being anti-American. Now I will grant them that what he said was not the most patriotic of things however he was addressing what has been done to blacks in America not America itself. People are unable to separate themselves. Also for someone who has sad that racism is the intelligent answer and being understanding and empathetic to others is the fools path Mark sure is crying a lot of foul when he thinks the tables have been turned.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/21/2008 @ 4:54pm

43. Gee mom! I'm a complicit bigot!

    and look! no Hands!!!

    Posted by crabwalk at 04/22/2008 @ 07:03am