Andrew, I'm sorry you posted this, because I must again back away from my stance against ageism for McCain's case. This mispronouncing speech pattern is making me rethink his mental fitness for the job of POTUS.

Ronald Reagan was almost McCain's age, but RR had been an actor, whose skills at memorization and speaking made being POTUS easier at his age, although he still at times would exhibit mental functioning impairment, which lead some to speculate on the onset of Alzheimer's.

I have known people in their 80's who were sharp as a tack. But I don't think McCain would be one.

Interestingly enough I saw Obama stumble,bumble and slur when asked an off the cuff question he was not briefed on,perhaps both are actors who only perform when they've read their lines?.

Originally posted by Andrew E. Wiggin
McCain struggles with skills as Orator

McCain can't read a written speech well at all. Anything pre-prepared doesn't work for him. That's not good for someone who wants to be POTUS.

Obama can't put two words together unless it's written out for him before hand in a pretty speech. That also isn't good for someone who wants to be POTUS.

Bush 43 got through 8 years of stumbling and bumbling over both written speeches AND daily non-formal speech. He was bad at both.

McCain and Obama are good in one area and bad in another.

That means that both McCain and Obama are only half as bad at speaking as Bush 43 is (was).

What exactly is the point of this thread, Andrew? He stumbled in a speech and is not as good of an orator as Obama seems to be; so what? What does that have to do with the ability to lead or relate to his ability to make the right decisions for America?

What are you hoping to prove? If it is somehow supposed to be proof of faulty mental facilities, then perhaps we should also question Barack Obama's senility; we've seen him stutter, stumble, and mispeak as well. All this proves is that when people talk for hours on end, every day of the week, they are bound to make mistakes.

On a tangent, Andrew, while I usually scoff at the idea of "paid-disinformants" operating on the boards, I have to admit I've grown a bit suspicious of you. This post and several others you've made have the feel of a campaign email or talking-points, reminiscint of nonsensical, non-issues you often see in those. If you are working for the Obama campaign, more power to you; you have every right to be here as everyone else. I am just interested in honesty and disclosure.

What do you expect from a gormless puppet who reads from a script?