Freight Train sleeps through McCain’s whistle-stop tour

August 8, 2008

DES MOINES, Iowa – Republican presidential candidate John McCain conducted a whistle-stop tour through the Iowa State Fair on Friday but Freight Train was unimpressed.
The Arizona senator did what all politicians do at the fair. He pressed the flesh. He mounted a soapbox, actually a microphone placed behind bales of straw, and munched on some pork chops on a stick.
He may have won some votes when he praised the fair and its 1 million-plus visitors as true to the heartland of America. But he didn’t win over Freight Train.
The prize boar — all 1,259 pounds of him — stayed resolutely asleep throughout his visit, resting his enormous bulk on a bed of sand.
“I saw the new champion and world record-breaker boar, Freight Train. He’s in good health. I can tell you that,” McCain later said at a fund-raiser.
“I lament and had thought with some nostalgia about last year’s winner Big Red who is no longer with us. But perhaps I had part of him in a pepperoni pizza — who knows,” he said.

Click here for more Reuters 2008 campaign coverage.

Photo credit: Reuters/Ilya Naymushin (A wild boar stands in an open cage at a zoo in the Siberian city of Krasnoyark in 2006)


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

Too bad McCain didn’t bother to explain his lies in his latest campaign ads as well as his claims that Obama is going to raise taxes on these same people – the poor and middle class.

McCain’s own chief economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, has said that it is inaccurate to say that “Barack Obama raises taxes.” Moreover, contrary to Rove’s assertion that McCain “opposes tax increases,” McCain recently suggested he would be open to raising Social Security payroll taxes, drawing a stern rebuke from many conservatives, including the Wall Street Journal editorial board.

During the July 27 edition of ABC’s This Week, after host George Stephanopoulos asked if “payroll taxes are on the table,” McCain responded: “There is nothing that’s off the table. I have my positions, and I’ll articulate them. But nothing’s off the table.” McCain had previously pledged there would be “no new taxes” in a McCain administration. In a July 30 editorial about McCain’s remarks on This Week, headlined “McCain’s Tax Blunder,” the Wall Street Journal asserted that McCain “tried to give up the tax issue,” and further wrote: “Meeting with us last December, before the primaries, [McCain] declared that ‘I will not agree to any tax increase,’ repeating the phrase for emphasis. He did not say any tax increase with the exception of Social Security.” Additionally, the Associated Press reported in a July 28 article that McCain’s comments about Social Security “drew a strong response Monday from the Club for Growth, a Washington anti-tax group,” which stated in a letter to McCain that his remarks were “shocking because you have been adamant in your opposition to raising taxes under any circumstances.”

So clearly, McCain doesn’t even know what HIS plans are for taxes, much less Obama’s. Perhaps he should focus on what he plans to do — get it right in his head first — before telling American yet another BIG WHOPPING LIE… something he seems fairly comfortable with doing.

McCain = BUSH = More of the SAME

Posted by Casey | Report as abusive

McCain is McSame as McBush is McLame.

McCain has no new ideas just old regurgitated republican tried and failed policies. If McCain somehow manages to steal the election then our country will surely see a great depression.

Vote Obama, vote for freedom, vote for America!

Posted by BushGuiltyAsSin | Report as abusive

I hear Obama and his supporters manipulatively saying over and over that John McCain is another Bush term. However, under meticulous scrutiny it is George W Bush and Barrack Obama who are the candidates that so closely resemble one another in their pursuits for the presidential office as they both share some very eerie similarities. Those similarities are definitely not in their family backgrounds or their skin color but in their actions of attempting to draw support based on rhetoric and appearance. That they both seem to have worked especially hard to convey false hopes and not reality to attract the types voters who are very reminiscent of being supporters of high school popularity contests that are also often gone awry, where shallow admiration turns to outright idolizing based on looks and physical appearance (Obama’s & Bush’s) and privilege given to family names (Bush for being from prosperity and Obama for being from lesser prosperity) and, as is often the case, the superficially idolized receiving large chunks of cash (Bush & Obama) and media coverage (Bush for his family name & Obama for his skin color) to continue outspending and out talking reality and perpetuating their falsities and manipulations.

Consequentially, the behavior that these superficial candidates and their “supporters” continue to perpetuate includes not respecting, not honoring, not reporting about and not supporting people based on their hard work, reasonable character, experience, ability, qualifications and willingness to speak out against injustice.

And yet another eerie similarity between Bush and Obama that we should not forget is that of George W. Bush’s and Barrack Obama’s consistent actions of working to desensitize the American citizenry about their rightful place as overseers and companions toward government and community affairs. With the power hungry appetites that consume both Bush’s and Obama’s speeches and actions it is not hard to spot these repeated attempts to desensitize the American people and undermine democracy as they continually work to hijack the democratic process by speaking about and acting toward our collectively elected U.S. governmental body and U.S. representatives and the collective democratic decision making process using singular possessory terms such as “I” and “My” instead of embracing the democratically collective decision making process by emphasizing the process and institution as belonging to all of “Us”, “We” and “Ours”.

George W Bush wasn’t qualified to be president of the United States to command our military and our finances and affect our health, happiness and our security and neither is Barrack Obama.

Posted by CJ | Report as abusive

McCain, McBush, what’s the difference? Even a boar is bored by same old mcnothing of McSame. McCain fought for his country, but that was a long time ago. Since then he has been a calssic politician deliverying nothing, same old stuff and negative politicking. What a bore!

Posted by Montague Pipps | Report as abusive

wow…I read the article and then the posts….from the lame article and the subsequent posts, it seems that the obama supporters are getting desperate and bitter. You dug your own grave…its not to late to come back over to Hillary’s corner. Being bitter about Barack’s inability to rise in the polls is not inherently bad, but not being able to admit he was the wrong choice is just sad. This guy is an absolute nightmare, an empty shell….even McCain would be better. And no, McCain’s policy’s hardly mirror Bush’s. As far as I see it, the only similarities are the Bush tax cuts and the early approval of the war in Iraq and latter support for the surge. Those being the only similar stances, the highly vocal disagreements between McCain and Bush are very numerous. McCain staunchly opposed Bush’s handling of the war, has defended an alternative energy policy for years, while no other republican would touch it. Has a history of bi-partisan efforts under his belt. And unlike Bush and Obama, he has publicly claimed to have little policy-making knowledge of the economy. This seems like a good thing for a candidate rather than a bad thing, as it is not the responsibility, nor should it be, to make economic policy. Obama aims to interject his “knowledge of the economy(what has he done to gain such experience with the economy?). Bush claimed a level of economic preparedness as well, and his judgment many times seemed at odds with those who actually knew what they were doing.

Obama won the primaries ‘fair’ and square with the help of the enamored media. Hillary got swift boated by her own party, caught up in the possibility of having a black person running who may actually not be a dud. Unfortunately, the glamor is not enough and only about 46% of people are willing to fall for an unqualified candidate. He fulfills every requirement, but is absolutely not up to the job. While Obama has been campaigning continuously for months, it is Hillary who has the better chance of winning in November. I just hope that the Democrats realize before the convention. As unlike Bush as McCain is, and for all of his uncharacteristic-of-a-republican stances(energy/environment/sometimes guns/working with rather than against democrats) I would prefer a democrat have a chance again just to see what can be accomplished. But if we don’t change our mind about Barack and nominate Hillary, I will welcome a McCain presidency with open arms. Four years of McCain(he only wants to be president for four years), vs Obama for 2 years and then more over the top lies and campaining for a second term is worth alot to me. Hillary should run in 2012 after McCain decided not to run for re-election. And if McCain somehow fails to beat Obama, Hillary should run against him in 2012 as well, incumbent or not. After four years of this guy learning to be qualified, America will be screaming for someone to come in from the start with qualifications instead of a learn-as-you-go president.

Posted by Karlthomas | Report as abusive