I wonder which set of Specifics Mr. McCain is going to want to hear? The ones that put him on one side of an issue before he was on the other side of an issue? Or the ones from the OTHER side of an issue before he was back to the first side?

John McCain. Flip Flopper Extraordinaire.

I'm looking forward to getting into specifics. We'll see the clear differences between Obama and McCain who is now promising 4 more years of the Bush failure we've endured for seven years. .

Bill Clinton's former campaign manager has endorsed Obama.

Big Mac: "I have not observed every speech he has given obviously, but they are singularly lacking in specifics" Signs of attacking from a weak position: Criticize things you don't know about!

Big Mac: "To encourage a country with only rhetoric rather than sound and proven ideas that trust in the strength and courage of free people is not a promise of hope. It is a platitude." It worked for Regan, and looks to me each repub candidate has about broken his spine trying to bend over backwards to be the next 'Regan'.

Big Mac: It's not an accident that he has, I think, according to the National Journal, the most liberal voting record in the United States Senate." Of course its not an accident. Its a lie. Check the National Journal's statistics, they don't even come close to portraying Obama as a having the most liberal voting record.

I'm sick and tired of people claiming Barack Obama doesn't have "specifics". Why the hell don't these people actually read his web-site and LISTEN to some of his speeches and the conversations he's had publicly before they leap to unsubstantiated conclusions? McCain will be one sorry dude if he doesn't prep better than this before he has to debate Obama.

Yeah I read that too and for a sec my heart leaped into my chest when I thought they were talking about the one that just left HRC's campaign. lol.

I wish they'd refer to Hillary as Hillary or HRC. When I see 'Clinton' I think of Bill. I mean he WAS president for 2 terms.

Senator McCain has just been listening to Senator Clinton's supporters, and is spouting the same b.s. that her camp likes to spout...

Thanks, Clintonistas...

OTOH, Senator McCain appears to be making the same mistake that Senator Clinton has already made with this particular line of attack, so it's all good... LOL

They say he doesn't have "specifics" because they are trying to build a narrative in the press that may convince people that this is true, even though it is not. Same as the Clinton camp has been pushing the narrative that "he's a great orator with no substance" (I have noticed this for some time among her followers, but now I see that it's coming straight from her campaign - see the commericial posted earlier today), and also the narrative that he lacks experience and she has experience. None of these things bear up to scrutiny, but they're hoping that most people won't actually read his site or look up his resume (or hers) or look at his very specific policy proposals. They are hoping that, like the never-ending criticism of John Edwards' haircut, these ideas will seep into the public consciousness and become the common belief.

That's politics.

Yeah I read that too and for a sec my heart leaped into my chest when I thought they were talking about the one that just left HRC's campaign. lol.

Ha, I did the same thing! Wouldn't that be something.

But yes, I agree about "Clinton" - it's tough because I automatically read "Bill" when I see that too; it's confusing. That's why I was sure to say "Bill Clinton" in my post, but you are absolutely right, HRC would have been better. I balk at using "Hillary" just because I feel that she is an accomplished woman who deserves the same respect as the men get (using last names or full names) - using just the first name seems inappropriately familiar and a little condescending. Unless we refer to them all by first name. Which is fine by me too, and I've done it that way before.

So uh..Bill, Barack and Hillary it is, then. :)

What group of 80-year-olds did he have standing behind him today when he said this?

Which specific positions of McCains does he imagine the general electorate will find more attractive? Would it be McCains call for at least a 100 more years in Iraq verses Obama's plan to begin to bring the troops home on day one that will get the 70% of the public who opposes the Iraq War to race to McCain's side? Perhaps its his vague ideas about reforming health care that are mostly fixated on lowering Medicare costs by removing Federal guidelines so States can have at it, while virtually ignoring the cost of everyone else's rising healthcare. In contrast Obama's plan offers specific measures to lower costs and increase benefits.

It's amazing to me that in this day of easy Internet Access that people don't just click over to the Candidates Homepage. Every canidate has one. Just take a quick look over McCains brief list of issues and that look Obama's much longer detailed issues list and see who is the specific candidate. Hint, it ain't McCain.

I am aware of how he hopes to attack McCain:

"Mr. Obama, in his victory speech in Madison, Wis., acted almost as the primaries were behind him, offering a case against the probable Republican nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, as he spoke disparagingly of “Bush-McCain Republicans.” It amounted to a preview of what an Obama-McCain race might be like, and it reduced Mrs. Clinton, at least for one night, to the role of bystander."

-New York Times, 2/13/08

If your really intrested in specifics. Go to Obama's site and get his 60 page plan.

McCain is attacking Obama because he'd rather run against Hillary.

Like the economy, for instance?

If I recall correctly economics is not the strong suit of the Straight Talk Express.