Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Fighting-fit McCain rejects backing from controversial TV preachers



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 24 May 2008
JOHN McCain yesterday sought to underline his fitness for office as he distanced himself from the comments of two controversial pastors and opened his medical records to the public.
The Republican presidential nominee in waiting will turn 72 in August and would be the oldest US president elected to a first term of office.

His age has become an issue in light of the Democrats' likely selection of 46-year-old Barack Obama
as their candidate for the November election.

The details of Mr McCain's health are contained in 1,173 pages of documents spanning 2000-8 his campaign made available to reporters to make the case that he is healthy enough to serve as president.

Mr McCain a three-time melanoma survivor, remains at risk for developing new skin cancers, and gets a thorough check-up by a Mayo Clinic dermatologist every few months.

Tests also show that his heart is in good condition.

Dr John Eckstein, his long-time doctor, said: "Physiologically he is considerably younger than his chronologic age based on his cardiovascular fitness. A cardiologist (who ran tests on Mr McCain] said that he had not seen anyone that age exercise for that long in a long time."

Meanwhile, Mr McCain rejected endorsements from two influential but controversial televangelists, saying there was no place for their incendiary criticisms of other faiths.

The Republican rejected the endorsement of John Hagee, a Texan preacher, after an audio recording surfaced in which Mr Hagee said that God sent Adolf Hitler to help Jews reach the promised land.

In the sermon, delivered in the late 1990s, the preacher said: "A hunter is someone with a gun, and he forces you. Hitler was a hunter … How did it happen? Because God allowed it to happen. Why did it happen? Because God said, 'My top priority for the Jewish people is to get them to come back to the land of Israel'."

Mr McCain called the comments "crazy and unacceptable".

He also repudiated the support of Rod Parsley, an Ohio preacher who has sharply criticised Islam and called the religion inherently violent.

In a statement, Mr McCain said: "I find (Mr Hagee's] remarks and others deeply offensive and indefensible, and I repudiate them. I did not know of them before Mr Hagee's endorsement, and I feel I must reject his endorsement as well."

And on Mr Parsley, the senator said: "There is no place for that kind of dialogue in America. I repudiate such talk, and I reject his endorsement."

Mr McCain has faced a barrage of criticism over Mr Hagee, with some comparing the situation to the controversy Mr Obama faced over the views of his long-time and now former pastor, the Rev Jeremiah Wright. Mr Obama said: "John McCain has to deal with Hagee, who said something mind-boggling. I don't attribute those statements to John McCain. Nobody thinks McCain believes that stuff.

"And for McCain to then suggest that every single statement that was made by somebody is somehow attributable to me is just wrong. It is just not accurate," Mr Obama said.

Mr Hagee issued a statement saying he was weary of the controversy and was withdrawing his endorsement.

BACKGROUND

WHILE age has not been an explicit issue of the campaign to date, Barack Obama has campaigned on a call for change, while John McCain has highlighted his experience, especially on national security.

And Mr McCain yesterday put his military experience at the forefront of his campaign, attacking Mr Obama, the likely Democratic nominee, for never having served in uniform. The move was the latest sign that Mr McCain believes he will face Mr Obama at the polls.

Mr McCain hit out after Mr Obama accused him of posturing by opposing a bill giving university scholarships to those who have served in the military for just three years.

"I will not accept from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regard for those who did," Mr McCain said.







The full article contains 683 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 23 May 2008 10:14 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: US elections
 
1

Scullion,

Canada 24/05/2008 02:39:29
Mr. McCain is simply too one dimensional to be an inspiring leader. His strong suit, military duty and its associated cachet, has greatly receded from what it once was in the U.S.(though the war in Iraq may have increased it slightly)as evidenced by the victories of Clinton and GWB. The latter's posing in front of a jet as a Texas Air National Guardsman was not as much military duty as a photo op.
2

Itchy,

24/05/2008 03:06:35
#1 Barack Obama is too left-wing in his economics and too friendly with racists to be an inspiring leader.
3

,

24/05/2008 07:25:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
4

Stonefield,

24/05/2008 09:23:16
3 Infidel

"He also repudiated the support of Rod Parsley, an Ohio preacher who has sharply criticised Islam and called the religion inherently violent." Says the report. In other words Parsley spoke the truth.

Islam is inherently violent.
5

W Smith,

Middle East 24/05/2008 09:33:55
Well said Rod Parsley - whoever he is.

A Dutch MP has made a film recently saying the same thing and many Dutch MP's are under 24 hour protection for saying so.

Some muslim guy is able to walk around London with a placard that reads 'Behead those who isult Islam' and the silence from many Scottish MP's and MSPs is ominous.

Compare Rod Parsley remarks with that of our Alex Salmond "the Islamic faith is one of the world's great religions".

We're still waiting for Alex to publicly endorse Scottish Protestanism which gave us, at one point, the best education system in the world and helped produce, for a while, some of 'the world's greatest' scientists and engineers.

BTW
Unlike some Imams there is no historical evidence to suggest that John Knox was against educating girls or stoning women to death for 'allowing' themselves to be raped.
6

W Smith,

Middle East 24/05/2008 09:47:27
Its only a two horse race, eventually, for the Presidency.

Obama has already aroused suspicion amongst his own, the Democrats voters, and some of them, having to chose between him and McCain, may end up voting for McCain.

The Scotsman has glossed over the issue with Reverend Wright and his association with the Nation of Islam.

Obama has attended this guys church for 20 years and had no issue with this wacko.

Personally I think Condi Rice could mop the floor with Obama in terms of IQ levels and she doesn't have a chip on her shoulder despite not being brought up in Hawaii like the very priveledged Obama.

To gain some street credibility private educated Obama has to invent injustices to justify his rants.

Obama is to John McCain what Michael Foot was to Margaret Thatcher - he's so treacherous even the 'blue collar' voters in america can smell it and they're going to swing possibly, not in the Tommy Sheridan sense, and vote McCain.
7

Carolyn 1,

24/05/2008 13:18:14
@5 W Smith

John Knox had God fearing citizens ripping apart churches and destroying cherished items of their history. These God fearing men became convinced they were superior and their wives and daughters were evil.

It's taken centuries to undo the hatred and misogyny Knox spawned and all for the power and money it brought him. Women still to this day are not viewed as equals to men. Catholics continue to be second rate citizens.

Hitler was no different in his climb to power- he somehow convinced good German people that they were a superior race; he was successful because it was a slow brainwashing that started with the youth. And then when elders saw what was happening, it was too late to speak out or against the superior.

Obama's largest supporters of his very progressive and very liberal agenda are two categories: the blacks and the college students.

FWIW, when Obama sent his best wishes to Kennedy after the cancer diagnosis, Obama did not send his 'prayers' although all others certainly did.

McCain's problem is that he talks softly and without pushing. He cannot mesmerize a crowd with a stage performance quality. The guy is 'normal' like the rest of us.
8

57Nomad,

california 24/05/2008 13:31:49
Carolyn

You are correct about Obamas supporters. The college students may support him now but they are notorious no-shows at the ballot box. Most of them are in class and many attend school out of their home precincts and can't get to the polls. Also many consider it cool to voice support but lame to actually do something like go stand in line and vote.
9

Carolyn 1,

24/05/2008 14:14:59
Good Morning Nomad,
I disagree about being no-shows.

Considering the massive turn-outs for his speeches, and that it carried over to the polls too, it would be foolhardy to think this base would do a u-turn, become apathetic and stay home.

The top tv show is American Idol for a reason. Obama's base shares a lot with the pop idolatry in Hollywood- they will vote and in record numbers to make him the winner and watch him claim his fame.

Next year this country may well be balancing in the most inexperienced hands in the history of this country, and at a time when we need the most experienced.
He's little more than a mouthpiece for whatever he's memorized from the latest adviser. This is equally frightening.

10

Carolyn 1,

24/05/2008 14:15:32
As for standing in line- that they do, and do well.

This bunch of college kids are great sheep.

They are accustomed to standing in lines in a way our generation never did: first at McDonalds, and then Starbucks, at concerts and movies, lines to buy a phone, lines to buy the Harry Potter book, lines to buy the latest video game...

They'll vote in record numbers
11

Eric_the_Red2,

24/05/2008 14:55:12
#2: While in relation to others in the race Obama may appear 'left wing': if he was a politician over here his likely position would be on the neoliberal(dominant) wing of New Labour. Hilliary is a shade to thr right of that, so perhaps a moderate conservative.

#4: "Islam is inherently violent" Now I'm an athiest myself but there's nothing in history, nor nothing within the religion itself that makes this true. There are extremist groups within both religious and political groups of all shades, but this isn't inherent to Islam.

#5: "We're still waiting for Alex to publicly endorse Scottish Protestanism which gave us, at one point, the best education system in the world and helped produce, for a while, some of 'the world's greatest' scientists and engineers"

Salmond did this publicly last autumn, almost to the word. Where were you? However Calvanist Scotland wasn't exactly the jolliest place to be.
12

Golly,

24/05/2008 15:02:14
1 Scullion,Canada

"Bush posing in front of a jet as a Texas Air National Guardsman was not as much military duty as a photo op"

I have photos of me and my mates from 20 years ago when we were in the army. What's wrong with Bush having a photo standing next to a jet he earned his wings on? Learning how to fly a fighter jet is no easy feat.

You often have snide remarks, is it because of a lack of manhood on your part?
13

MacLaren,

24/05/2008 16:36:59
Carolyn 1 & 57Nomad

College students are supporting Obama because of professors brainwashing, after all professors for the most part can't do so they teach. Also students like to do things for the shock value. What’s more of a shock value than voting for a Presidential candidate like them has no experince
14

,

24/05/2008 16:38:06
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

Eric_the_Red2,

24/05/2008 18:19:51
Chill out, i'll try and explain my 'breathtaking ignorance' on the subject. The key word here is 'inherent'. The main world religions that exist today began centuries and centuries ago, as did their founding and/or key texts. What I am trying to explain is that their is nothing inherent within Islam that makes is more or less violent that other religions or political ideologies.

So what is the Qu'ran says this stuff? Religious texts say a lot of things: you can find pretty much anything you want in the old testament of the Bible if you wish to cast Christianity as a violent religion. You could equally go through European history, from the crusades, to the late medieval wars of religion, to the Thirty Years War, and so on, and find a history of violence in the name of Christain beliefs, and atrocities done in the name of the Christain God. Does this mean that Christianity is inherently violent?

Take the Islamic stretching from Spain to India, reaching its peak with the invasion of southern France(sometime around the early 8th century I think).

The most marked difference in this age was the striking difference between Islamic areas and Chirstian areas of Europe, during our 'Dark Age'. In this period, Muslin Spain (which set up its own Caliphate)had irrigated spanish soil for improved agriculture, and had mixed communities of Christains, Jews and Muslims living among each other. The policy of the entire Islamic empire at this time was in fact to tolerate other people's customs and practices, as long as they paid their taxes. When the Christian Spanish Kingdoms of Leon, Castille and Aragon began to conquer the Iberian peninsula, their torelance was somewhat less, i.e. forced eviction and eventually pogroms of Jewish and Muslim communities.

My point? Neither christianity nor Islam is inherently violent. Just because people have used religion to justify their actions, and religious texts written centuries ago say violent things, doesn't mean a religion is in
16

Eric_the_Red2,

24/05/2008 18:20:20
Chill out, i'll try and explain my 'breathtaking ignorance' on the subject. The key word here is 'inherent'. The main world religions that exist today began centuries and centuries ago, as did their founding and/or key texts. What I am trying to explain is that their is nothing inherent within Islam that makes is more or less violent that other religions or political ideologies.

So what is the Qu'ran says this stuff? Religious texts say a lot of things: you can find pretty much anything you want in the old testament of the Bible if you wish to cast Christianity as a violent religion. You could equally go through European history, from the crusades, to the late medieval wars of religion, to the Thirty Years War, and so on, and find a history of violence in the name of Christain beliefs, and atrocities done in the name of the Christain God. Does this mean that Christianity is inherently violent?

Take the Islamic stretching from Spain to India, reaching its peak with the invasion of southern France(sometime around the early 8th century I think).

The most marked difference in this age was the striking difference between Islamic areas and Chirstian areas of Europe, during our 'Dark Age'. In this period, Muslin Spain (which set up its own Caliphate)had irrigated spanish soil for improved agriculture, and had mixed communities of Christains, Jews and Muslims living among each other. The policy of the entire Islamic empire at this time was in fact to tolerate other people's customs and practices, as long as they paid their taxes. When the Christian Spanish Kingdoms of Leon, Castille and Aragon began to conquer the Iberian peninsula, their torelance was somewhat less, i.e. forced eviction and eventually pogroms of Jewish and Muslim communities.
doesn't mean a religion is inherently violent. Islam has been the source of some of the most fantastic innovations humans have come up with, and equally has been used by extreme people to justify their actions. Christianit
17

Eric_the_Red2,

24/05/2008 18:21:47

, doesn't mean a religion is inherently violent. Islam has been the source of some of the most fantastic innovations humans have come up with, and equally has been used by extreme people to justify their actions. Christianity has birthed some extremely tolerant and compassionate ideas, as well as birthing the Crusades and present day extremist cults in the U.S.

None of the mainsteam monotheist religions today are 'inherently' violent. That doesn't mean that no one practising religion will never be violent: they are just people, and people may be subject to extremist brainwashing in any ideology: not just extreme version of Islam.

Basically, open your mind a tiny chink and you'll mabye understand what I mean.

Apologies for the extra post.
18

Media 1,

cape town 24/05/2008 21:32:56
American Evangelism is probably the most dangerous form of religious hatred on the planet. These people are stark raving mad, they are evil to the core and cannot be trusted.
I honestly see these American evangelicals as the most barabric and utterly despicable monsters on the planet. Give me Osama any day over the maniac Hagee
19

Laurette,

Carlsbad, California 25/05/2008 00:14:40
Carolyn: I would feel much more comfortable with an Obama Cabinet with possibly Dodd and Biden on it rather than a McCain one with Lieberman and Graham covering for a doddering old warmonger's gaffs.
20

57Nomad,

california 25/05/2008 01:08:50
#9 Carolyn

My observations about no-shows is based on the recent past. What happened in the past is no guarantee of what's going to happen in the future, it's better than no data at all. George McGovern ran with this same base of support in 1972 against Richard Nixon and was trounced. College students and young people in general don't show up in national elections. The reason for the tortured primary process that the Dems have in place is to prevent a repeat of '72. I despise her, but Hillary Clinton is a far more formidable opponent than Obama. The wiser heads among the Dems know this and are stuck with a real dilemma. They know Obama can't win and will likely have profoundly negative coattails. But if the give the nomination to Herself they will alienate their most important constituency, the blacks. In chess this is know as being forked. I'd say the Dems are definitely forked.
21

57Nomad,

california 25/05/2008 01:10:31
# 18 M1

M1 said:

"Give me Osama any day over the maniac Hagee"

Okay.
22

57Nomad,

california 25/05/2008 01:19:41
#13 MacLaren

"College students are supporting Obama because of professors brainwashing, after all professors for the most part can't do so they teach."

There is one thing here to keep in mind. Because a large base of Obama's are college students, that doesn't mean that college students in general are supporting him. It just means that no one else is turning out to cheer him on. If you gathered all of the students supporting him in one place and all those who weren't in another place, 'another place' would have many times more students in it.

Voting, like tying ones shoes or going to the store is a behavior. People are likely to do those things they have done in the past and are less likely to do those things they haven't. They are not accustomed to voting and they will not be voting in any greater numbers this year than they have in the past. MTV mounts a Dem oriented blitz every election hectoring their viewers to "rock the vote." They have not been successful.
23

Carolyn 1,

25/05/2008 02:21:25
19
Laurette,Carlsbad, California

How naive you are.
People learn from experience. When you touch a hot stove a kid learns to never touch it again. Experience matters.

McCain has had a long life learning and gaining experience and knowledge. He spent more years experiencing torture and in solitary confinement than Obama has experience in his cushy no decision few years at the Senate. Obama is 38 and has accomplished nothing in his life except give speeches.
He has never written a legal article, he's never written one piece of legislation, he's never even handled a notable law court case.


Obama will take this country to its bleakest hours.
24

Carolyn 1,

25/05/2008 02:35:13
Nomad-
I really did not like Bill Clinton or his Whitehouse. Last year I used to say, if the race is between a monkey and Hillary, I'll vote the chimp. Wow, have I changed my mind about Hillary. She's got my vote and she got it the old-fashioned way- she earned it. I think she'll do a helluva job with what this country has on its plate right now.

However, listening to Tim Russert, Chris Matthews and the rest of the pundits, I realize she has no chance and never did: the media will do what it takes to stop her from getting the nomination.

I still disagree with you about the turnout- I think the blacks and the college students will have record voting for Obama, and the democrats will carry states they never carry before.

The republicans can't win because the evangelicals, like this guy Hagee will not vote for McCain, especially if Romney is vp. I think the evangelical fundamentalists loathe Mormons more than they hate progressive liberals.
25

Laurette,

25/05/2008 15:21:09
Carolyn:
Obama will take this country to its bleakest hours.

Apparently you think that the last few years under this criminal Administration were the best we've had. You obviously care nothing about the Constitution. My loyalty is to it and for what it stands for - not to the current occupant of the White House, who by the way, wasn't exactly great on experience when he was given the Presidency. At least it's good to know that I'll offset your vote.
26

Laurette,

Carlsbad, California 25/05/2008 15:33:40
Carolyn: As a lady in my 70's - I lost my Naivete about Politics a very long time ago.
You talk about experience - exactly what was the current occupant of the White House's before he took office? Governor of Texas is a figurehead position.
The three stooges, McCain, Lieberman and Graham don't exactly inspire confidence in me as I see nothing but War in our future if McCain is elected. What I see is a doddering old man trying to fight a new war and I don't want that for my grandchildren.
27

Carolyn 1,

25/05/2008 20:24:58
Laurette
That doddering old man is trying to end a war.

Obama can't recall, or never learned, the correct history of the region, never mind know how to lead a nation through the peril of the mideast. As commander and chief he needs to know some basics.

Obama has never even had a meeting about Afghanistan and he's head of the committee!!!! How 'peculiar' is that???

-And what harsh words of criticism for a 'lady' of your age...if your loyalty is to the constitution,and I hope you mean the US constitution, you would be well aware that a governor of a state is not a figurehead position as you suggest. Where did you get THAT crazy notion??

...as for your remark that Bush WAS GIVEN THE PRESIDENCY.... now your true self shows itself. If Gore won his own hometown state, he'd be president. He did not. Get over it. If Gore won the Jewish vote in Florida he'd be president. He didn't. Get over it. If Gore won the military vote (not that it was counted) he would be president. He didn't. Get over it. Bush won his reelection. Gees. Move on.

Sorry, but no, I did not think that being attacked by al Queda was the best years of this country or the best years of my life. My business was not able to recover as a result of the attack so it had profound effects on my family and income. Being a Californian you may not realize, or care, that the trauma of the attack caused a lot of damage in a lot of ways to us in the New York region. I DO think the best years of my life were under Reagan: and I do this country will never again live so well as it did under Reagan.


28

57Nomad,

california 25/05/2008 23:24:36
#27 Carolyn

You are right about RR. He was the greatest man of the second half of the twentieth century. He has a special place in the hierarchy of hatred of the left because he destroyed the Soviet Union in which the left had invested all of their emotional capital. He was absolutely brilliant. When this current generation of crybaby ankle biters has passed from the scene Mt Rushmore will have another face on it.
29

57Nomad,

california 25/05/2008 23:37:08
#24 Carolyn

I wouldn't worry too much about the evangelicals. They are Americans just like everyone else and not likely to be led like lemmings over a cliff. If Obama is nominated he will be lucky to carry Massachusetts. Barak my have a lot of students cheering him on but they will not be a factor in the election. They didn't turn out for Kerry and they didn't turn out for Gore and there simply aren't that many of them.
30

CombatVet68,

28/05/2008 21:16:22
#18 Media 1

You are truly blind to the truth! You obviously have never known He who knew you before you were formed in your mothers womb. It is even more apparent that you have never wanted to know Him. Your ignorance overwhelms me.

A "True" Christian does not HATE his brother or sister, nor does he/she HATE his neighbor, or enemy! A carnal man, who calls himself or herself a "christian" and does not do the will of my Heavenly Father does not belong to the flock of my Lord Jesus Christ! In understanding this, your own words condemn you! For you are dried bones and you have not life! You call evil good and good evil, but I will not judge you, for there is One who judges rightly!
31

CombatVet68,

28/05/2008 21:51:47
#26 Laurette:

You are very right on one point...regardless WHO we elect...Violence is in our future, both here and across the world. This foolish idea that blind men and women seem to place in carnal men to lead them is absurd. What you are doing is giving your authority over to one man to govern you. If he is evil, you will inherit evil!

McCain is doing his best to seperate himself from any religious affilitations, even though it has been alleged that he is deeply religious. Obama is a "lip service" christian! He isn't quite sure as to just what he beleives. And Hillary, well, lets just say that her god is power and money. She serves the powers and principalities of this world, not God!

Many of you can readily understand the political process, see the storm clouds gather, saying that a storm is coming, but you are unable to truly discern the times in which you live. I speak not of myself and my knowledge, but of that which my Heavenly Father has revealed unto me.

This current generation preaches tolerance! Tolerance of Sin among you, homosexualiy, abortions, fornication, divorce,lying, but you fail to understand that sin acts as an anesthetic to the spirit of man, dulling the ability to discern what God is telling you. It brings seperation from God. And the more you yield to sin, both in society and in ones personal life, the greater authority you give to the powers and principalities of this world (Satan and his angels). In this you see an ever increasing occurence of violence and death, for satan came into this world to deceive, destroy, and murder. Needless to say, His activities are on the rise. In time, you'll have pure hell right here on earth, because you do not want God in your lives.
32

CombatVet68,

28/05/2008 22:03:32
#26 (Cont'd)

When I said..."In time, you'll have pure hell right here on earth, because you do not want God in your lives."

I was speaking metaphorically, for Hell is a very real place. However, many will think that life here is like hell! In truth, their minds can not comprehend the realities of hell.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.