John McCain to discontinue medical treatment

[silverscreenselect]

That the Manchurians (prolly North Koreans; been a while, like almost 60 years, since I saw the movie) have as their agent the *vice* president, not the president.

It's somewhat more complicated. Lansbury's second husband is a buffoonish Senator who is another McCarthy (the novel that this film is based on is more of a satire than a straight-out thriller like the film was), but it's clear that he's being manipulated by Lansbury. He gets nominated as Vice-President, and the plot is to have Harvey kill the Presidential candidate so the husband will assume the Presidential candidacy and undoubtedly win because of the sympathy factor and the idea that the Commies are out to get him. The Manchurian Candidate is, in my view, the best performance ever by Lansbury (who was Oscar-nominated in what's considered one of the great all-time villainous roles), Harvey, and Sinatra.

It's a good thing this is fiction and we don't really have easily manipulated buffoons running for the Presidency who are easily manipulated by a foreign government, all the while proclaiming how tough they are on that same foreign power.

[ghostjmf]

One great "movie factoid" is that Lansbury, who played Harvey's ice-blood-evil mama to perfection, was actually 2 or 3 years *younger* than Harvey at the time.

[wbtravis007]

Here's a McCain story from former Obama speechwriter Cody Keenan:

Met John McCain once. I was a 22 year old senate intern waiting for an elevator. The doors opened, and he and another GOP senator were inside. I apologized and said I'd wait for the next one, but McCain told me to hop on.

"Who do you work for?" he asked.

"Ted Kennedy, sir."

"He's a good man," McCain said. "Without him, we're lost."

The other Senator scoffed in disgust and got off the elevator at the next floor. While he was still in earshot, McCain raised his voice a little and said, "Don't mind him. He's an asshole."

And that's the time I met John McCain.

--Bob

Great story. Do you remember who the other senator was?

[Bob78164]

Here's a McCain story from former Obama speechwriter Cody Keenan:

Met John McCain once. I was a 22 year old senate intern waiting for an elevator. The doors opened, and he and another GOP senator were inside. I apologized and said I'd wait for the next one, but McCain told me to hop on.

"Who do you work for?" he asked.

"Ted Kennedy, sir."

"He's a good man," McCain said. "Without him, we're lost."

The other Senator scoffed in disgust and got off the elevator at the next floor. While he was still in earshot, McCain raised his voice a little and said, "Don't mind him. He's an asshole."

And that's the time I met John McCain.

--Bob

Great story. Do you remember who the other senator was?

As far as I know, Keenan has not disclosed that information. --Bob

[BackInTex]

Here's a McCain story from former Obama speechwriter Cody Keenan: --Bob

Great story. Do you remember who the other senator was?

As far as I know, Keenan has not disclosed that information. --Bob

It shouldn’t be hard to find out. How many honest senators are there?

[Beebs52]

Why is this Cody guy reliable? Fill me in

[Bob78164]

Why is this Cody guy reliable? Fill me in

His Wikipedia page says that he worked for Kennedy in the right time frame, and the story certainly matches my perception of Senator McCain.

But why would he make something like this up? And if he were making it up, say, to embarrass the other senator, wouldn't he have named him? --Bob

[Beebs52]

Why is this Cody guy reliable? Fill me in

His Wikipedia page says that he worked for Kennedy in the right time frame, and the story certainly matches my perception of Senator McCain.

But why would he make something like this up? And if he were making it up, say, to embarrass the other senator, wouldn't he have named him? --Bob

You're kidding, right?

[Bob78164]

Why is this Cody guy reliable? Fill me in

His Wikipedia page says that he worked for Kennedy in the right time frame, and the story certainly matches my perception of Senator McCain.

But why would he make something like this up? And if he were making it up, say, to embarrass the other senator, wouldn't he have named him? --Bob

You're kidding, right?

No, I'm serious. I think he's just someone who was sharing a warm memory of Senator McCain and I don't see how anyone could see it as a negative. It's no surprise that a lot of Republicans in general held Senator Kennedy in contempt, and I think it's well known that Senator McCain was quite fond of Senator Kennedy. The parting line certainly fits my image of Senator McCain as a plain-spoken maverick. So I don't see an issue. --Bob

[Beebs52]

His Wikipedia page says that he worked for Kennedy in the right time frame, and the story certainly matches my perception of Senator McCain.

But why would he make something like this up? And if he were making it up, say, to embarrass the other senator, wouldn't he have named him? --Bob

You're kidding, right?

No, I'm serious. I think he's just someone who was sharing a warm memory of Senator McCain and I don't see how anyone could see it as a negative. It's no surprise that a lot of Republicans in general held Senator Kennedy in contempt, and I think it's well known that Senator McCain was quite fond of Senator Kennedy. The parting line certainly fits my image of Senator McCain as a plain-spoken maverick. So I don't see an issue. --Bob

With all respect to Sen McCain, your and your cohorts' enamoration with his legacy is only a function of your anti-Trumperation. Yes. Made both words up.

[Bob78164]

You're kidding, right?

No, I'm serious. I think he's just someone who was sharing a warm memory of Senator McCain and I don't see how anyone could see it as a negative. It's no surprise that a lot of Republicans in general held Senator Kennedy in contempt, and I think it's well known that Senator McCain was quite fond of Senator Kennedy. The parting line certainly fits my image of Senator McCain as a plain-spoken maverick. So I don't see an issue. --Bob

With all respect to Sen McCain, your and your cohorts' enamoration with his legacy is only a function of your anti-Trumperation. Yes. Made both words up.

No, I admired and respected Senator McCain for a long time, even while disagreeing with him. Particularly at the campaign event, late in the 2008 campaign, where he wouldn't let a potential voter criticize his opponent for being an Arab. I think I may even have commented here on that incident when it occurred.

There's a lot in Senator McCain's politics that I disagreed with and I have contributed to his opponents in the past. But even when I disagreed with him (which was usually), I always thought he had earned my respect with his actions, both in uniform and in the Senate. It's really too bad that most of the Republican Party (judging by the candidates it nominates) now sees politics as a blood sport where one doesn't just disagree with the other party, but destroys it by any available means. That's why I agree with the former Republicans who say that the only cure is the political emasculation of the Republican Party, until and unless they rediscover that country is more important than party. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

now sees politics as a blood sport where one doesn't just disagree with the other party, but destroys it by any available means.

Oh, the irony.

[Beebs52]

No, I'm serious. I think he's just someone who was sharing a warm memory of Senator McCain and I don't see how anyone could see it as a negative. It's no surprise that a lot of Republicans in general held Senator Kennedy in contempt, and I think it's well known that Senator McCain was quite fond of Senator Kennedy. The parting line certainly fits my image of Senator McCain as a plain-spoken maverick. So I don't see an issue. --Bob

With all respect to Sen McCain, your and your cohorts' enamoration with his legacy is only a function of your anti-Trumperation. Yes. Made both words up.

No, I admired and respected Senator McCain for a long time, even while disagreeing with him. Particularly at the campaign event, late in the 2008 campaign, where he wouldn't let a potential voter criticize his opponent for being an Arab. I think I may even have commented here on that incident when it occurred.

There's a lot in Senator McCain's politics that I disagreed with and I have contributed to his opponents in the past. But even when I disagreed with him (which was usually), I always thought he had earned my respect with his actions, both in uniform and in the Senate. It's really too bad that most of the Republican Party (judging by the candidates it nominates) now sees politics as a blood sport where one doesn't just disagree with the other party, but destroys it by any available means. That's why I agree with the former Republicans who say that the only cure is the political emasculation of the Republican Party, until and unless they rediscover that country is more important than party. --Bob

Who advocates emasculation? I think I know to whom you refer but just explain.

[Bob78164]

With all respect to Sen McCain, your and your cohorts' enamoration with his legacy is only a function of your anti-Trumperation. Yes. Made both words up.

No, I admired and respected Senator McCain for a long time, even while disagreeing with him. Particularly at the campaign event, late in the 2008 campaign, where he wouldn't let a potential voter criticize his opponent for being an Arab. I think I may even have commented here on that incident when it occurred.

There's a lot in Senator McCain's politics that I disagreed with and I have contributed to his opponents in the past. But even when I disagreed with him (which was usually), I always thought he had earned my respect with his actions, both in uniform and in the Senate. It's really too bad that most of the Republican Party (judging by the candidates it nominates) now sees politics as a blood sport where one doesn't just disagree with the other party, but destroys it by any available means. That's why I agree with the former Republicans who say that the only cure is the political emasculation of the Republican Party, until and unless they rediscover that country is more important than party. --Bob

Who advocates emasculation? I think I know to whom you refer but just explain.

I've seen a number of Republicans and former Republicans say this. If memory serves, Max Boot and Steve Schmidt are two of them. George Will may have done so as well. If the Republican Party is not willing to elect Representatives who will hold the Administration to account for its patent violations of law and the Constitution (and primary results this year make it pretty clear that it's not), then the national Republican Party needs to suffer the same fate that the Republican Party has suffered in California -- electoral irrelevance. It took about 20 years in California. The clock is ticking on the national party. --Bob

[Beebs52]

No, I admired and respected Senator McCain for a long time, even while disagreeing with him. Particularly at the campaign event, late in the 2008 campaign, where he wouldn't let a potential voter criticize his opponent for being an Arab. I think I may even have commented here on that incident when it occurred.

There's a lot in Senator McCain's politics that I disagreed with and I have contributed to his opponents in the past. But even when I disagreed with him (which was usually), I always thought he had earned my respect with his actions, both in uniform and in the Senate. It's really too bad that most of the Republican Party (judging by the candidates it nominates) now sees politics as a blood sport where one doesn't just disagree with the other party, but destroys it by any available means. That's why I agree with the former Republicans who say that the only cure is the political emasculation of the Republican Party, until and unless they rediscover that country is more important than party. --Bob

Who advocates emasculation? I think I know to whom you refer but just explain.

I've seen a number of Republicans and former Republicans say this. If memory serves, Max Boot and Steve Schmidt are two of them. George Will may have done so as well. If the Republican Party is not willing to elect Representatives who will hold the Administration to account for its patent violations of law and the Constitution (and primary results this year make it pretty clear that it's not), then the national Republican Party needs to suffer the same fate that the Republican Party has suffered in California -- electoral irrelevance. It took about 20 years in California. The clock is ticking on the national party. --Bob

You are amusing.

[Bob Juch]

Great story. Do you remember who the other senator was?

As far as I know, Keenan has not disclosed that information. --Bob

It shouldn’t be hard to find out. How many honest senators are there?

I know of one honest Republican Senator. He's also from Arizona.

[BackInTex]

speaking of Ted Kennedy....

Dad who left toddler son to die after crash gets prison term

[Ritterskoop]

I became an admirer of McCain during the 2008 presidential campaign (he tried to run as a grown-up, which always impresses me - see John Kasich), so it's not connected to Trump.

[jarnon]

Jon Kyl, longtime Arizona senator and Republican leader, has come out of retirement to succeed McCain, at least through the end of the year.

Jon Kyl is a dear friend of mine and John’s. It’s a great tribute to John that he is prepared to go back into public service to help the state of Arizona.

[silverscreenselect]

Jon Kyl, longtime Arizona senator and Republican leader, has come out of retirement to succeed McCain, at least through the end of the year.

Jon Kyl is a dear friend of mine and John’s. It’s a great tribute to John that he is prepared to go back into public service to help the state of Arizona.

McCain's term expires in 2022. There will be a special election in 2020 for the remaining two years of that term. If Kyl resigns before then (he's 76 years old), the governor at the time would appoint another interim Senator. Governor Ducey's term expires at the end of this year. However, Ducey or any any new governor would be required under Arizona law to appoint a Republican to fill the seat.

[Ritterskoop]

I like the little we know of Cindy McCain, and would have supported her appointment, but this seems appropriate as well, to replace McCain with someone who has many of his same positions.

I told someone at work yesterday, "If you line up 100 assholes, 97 of them will be men. Just put any woman into any political position to replace most men, and we are likely to be better off than we were." I don't feel that way about most individual men I know in real life, though the left and right extremists on this board often prove the point.

[silverscreenselect]

I like the little we know of Cindy McCain, and would have supported her appointment, but this seems appropriate as well, to replace McCain with someone who has many of his same positions.

The primary qualification for McCain's replacement is someone who will be sure to cast a vote to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. With McCain home sick in Arizona, the party breakdown on a vote was 50-49; with Kyl, it's 51-49, and the Democrats would have to convince two Republicans to switch their votes (and keep all the red-state Democrats up for re-election like Manchin and Donnelly on board). Cindy McCain might have been too much of a risk in that regard in the Republicans' way of thinking.

[Estonut]

Cindy McCain might have been too much of a risk in that regard in the Republicans' way of thinking.

Time and time again, you show your ignorance about "the Republicans' way of thinking." Republicans are individual people and there is no single way of thinking.

[BackInTex]

I like the little we know of Cindy McCain, and would have supported her appointment, but this seems appropriate as well, to replace McCain with someone who has many of his same positions.

The primary qualification for McCain's replacement is someone who will be sure to cast a vote to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. With McCain home sick in Arizona, the party breakdown on a vote was 50-49; with Kyl, it's 51-49, and the Democrats would have to convince two Republicans to switch their votes (and keep all the red-state Democrats up for re-election like Manchin and Donnelly on board). Cindy McCain might have been too much of a risk in that regard in the Republicans' way of thinking.

What would she, or anyone, have against Kavanaugh that is a legitimate reason not to confirm him?

[silverscreenselect]

Cindy McCain might have been too much of a risk in that regard in the Republicans' way of thinking.

Time and time again, you show your ignorance about "the Republicans' way of thinking." Republicans are individual people and there is no single way of thinking.

Except that they all seem to come around to Donald Trump's way of thinking when it comes time to vote.

Or they leave the party as more of them are doing.