-
Website
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2008/06/john-mccain-not-too-important-for-troops-to-come-home/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
To a man-or a woman, in more than a few cases-they understand why we're there, and the job they've been given to do.
What McCain says is important is letting the withdrawal-let's face it, there's gonna be one-be dictated by conditions on the ground. That's no different than anything he's said before.
Let's all remember, by the way, that all those dhimmicrats who pounced on McCain today all also believed in the reasons for going to Iraq in the first place.
And this after he was discharged and reinstated for having a fight with a compatriot who slandered him.
He says we shouldn't believe a single word this administration is telling us about the war. Not a single word.
LOL
Q: If it’s working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that’s not too important. What’s important is the casualties in Iraq. Americans are in South Korea. Americans are in Japan. American troops are in Germany. That’s all fine.
I'll let Ambinder do the heavy lifting:
Obama believes that the presence of U.S. troops exacerbates the tension and gives Iraqis a crutch to delay political reconcilliation. McCain does not. One would think that those differences are a sufficient basis upon which to launch a political attack. Instead, though, in a conference call with reporters, in remarks by Democrats like Joe Biden, in a blistering statement by Rep. Rahm Emanuel, McCain is being portrayed as, inter alia, not caring one whit about casualties and deaths and chaos and certainly not about the families of troops who dealt with deployment after deployment.
If the Obama campaign was really committed to debating substantive issues of war and peace in good faith and in a civil tone, they'd repudiate the comments being pushed by their surrogates. And if Obama thinks that McCain is indifferent to the sacrifices being made by U.S. soldiers in Iraq, let him say it himself.
Attacking McCain's age will backfire.
Racism, sexism and now ageism are all alive and well in the Democrat party.
Pathetic.
"More than most any American, Sen. McCain knows the sacrifices that our men and women in uniform make and the burden that their families bear, and it really is wrong to suggest otherwise. Obviously he knows that from his own—from his father’s service and the impact it had on his family; from his own service and incarceration; from his eight visits to Iraq -- on which I’ve been with him on a lot of them -- and interacting with our troops there; and of course from the fact that his son was deployed to Iraq."
The LA Times quickly jumped on this. The "reporter" began by saying that Sen. McCain has made a point of not discussing his son and not making a political issue of his service. She then said she was surprised, therefore, to hear Lieberman mention that McCain has a son in the military, and should we expect that, from now on, McCain surrogates will be using his son's service to score political points.
So that's the strategy?
LA TIMES: "McCain doesn't understand what it's like to have family in Iraq"
MCCAIN CAMPAIGN: "Well, you know, his son ..."
LA TIMES [interrupting]: "bup bup bup, no no no, Senator McCain said he wouldn't use his son for political purposes. Why is he exploiting his son like this? Does he hate the military? Didn't he fire laser cannons from orbit during the Vietnam war anyway?"
They've posted it at their blog, under the hilarious title "Joe Lieberman makes political issue of John McCain's son" which ought to take some sort of award home, either for Teh Most Overblown Blog Title or maybe Most Pathetic Gotcha Evah!. (Blog awards should have hip spelling.)
I suppose it shouldn't come as a surprise. This is the same LA Times that thought McCain's military pension made him unfit for duty. When you're being echoed by the likes of DailyKos and the internet abomination americablog, you aren't exactly topping the credibility lists.
Evans is a notorious figure, notorious most recently for an inflammatory interview where she suggested that Osama bin Laden was basically being a reasonable chap defending his home:
Jodie Evans:… "We were attacked because we were in Saudi Arabia, that was the message of Osama, was that because we had our bases in the Middle East, he attacked the United States."
Paul A. Ibbetson: "Do you think that's a valid argument?"
Evans: "Sure. Why do we have bases in the Middle East? We totally violated the rights of that country. Why do we get to have bases in the Middle East?"
Code Pink is, of course, famous for their disruption of Congressional hearings, and for casting spells against Marine Recruiting Stations. Yes, that's right, spells.
Jodie Evans, though, is more than simply yet another radical leftist traitor hopping on the Obama bandwagon. Bundling wasn't really enough for her.
Code Pink and Evans in particular have been using their typical tactics in support of Senator Obama throughout his campaign. They have repeatedly disrupted Hillary events over the last year and a half, and even created an anti-Hillary website.
According to Variety magazine, (via Melanie Morgan), Evans was exerting heavy pressure in getting celebs to come to Obama over Clinton. The list of exploits goes on and on.
It seems there is another list that goes on and on. The list of radicals, extremists, and left-wing wackos out there working to get Obama elected. Obama is of them, he is from them. He's their guy, and their success.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-bergmann/who-has-no-fundamental-un_b_106493.html
I thought it was ridiculous that not only did he fumble Obama's so called "bitter" comment by inserting "Constitution", but did it dawn on his campaign that Obama is a CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER! You know, the really smart inadequate kind.
Gotta say, I think John Kerry let McCain have it. There was definitely no swiftboating there. I like the fact that Obama and his surrogates were on the attack as opposed to being on the defense. I agree with whatever pundit said he needs to do this more often. And do it well did he.
@Anonymous, if you think because it is pointed out that McCain has REPEATEDLY confused facts like surge levels, whom the actual combatants are(you do remember Lieberman whispering in his ear), etc is a form of ageism, oh well. For a candidate that sells himself as a subject matter expert on foreign policy or more specifically war, he sure sounds well...confused.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/6/11/21256/4677/594/534342
Fox News calls Michelle "Obama's baby mama," slang for an unwed mother.
What can we do? This is total BS, completely unacceptable.
EVERYBODY didn't agree with the war in the beginning. So that's a brazen lie.
France, Germany and Russia didn't believe the reasons for the invasion.
The UN Inspectors didn't believe the reasons for the invasion.
The anti war protestors didn't believe in the reasons for the invasion.
Dennis Kuchinich, Barbara Lee, Maxine Waters, Senator Ted Kennedy, the late Senator Paul Wellstone, Senator Barbra Boxer, Senator Robert Byrd, and others didn't believe in the reasons for the invasion.
Phil Donahue didn't believe in the reason for the invasion.
Scott Ritter didn't believe in the reason for the invasion.
Joe Wilson didn't believe in the reason for the invasion.
Al Gore didn't believe in the reason for the invasion.
Amy Goodman didn't believe in the reason for the invasion.
There were lots of people who didn't fall for the Bush Okey Doke. They were either drowned out by the media or called traitors, or tree huggers.
So d, where are the WMD?
Ms. Irena Briganti
Vice President of Public Relations
FOX News Channel
1211 Avenue Of The Americas
New York, NY 10036
Direct Phone : *212-301-3608
Outlet Fax : *212-382-1411
Outlet Phone : 212-301-3000
Email: irena.briganti@foxnews.com
Contact by: E-mail
Ms. Suzanne Scott
Vice President, Programming
FOX News Channel
1211 Avenue Of The Americas
New York, NY 10036
Direct Phone : *212-301-8558
Outlet Fax : *212-382-1411
Outlet Phone : 212-301-3000
Email: suzanne.scott@foxnews.com
WMD? How about getting up to speed...we are there...Iraq is our responsibility...we have a strategy that is showing signs of progress.
Why embrace rereat, defeat? For political gain?
Please defend the position of withdrawing immediately, even though progress is being achieved instead of reciting tired, outdated anti-war memes.
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2008/06/11/fox_obama/index.html?source=rss
Obama has hitched his political rising star to the wagon of failure in Iraq and an economic populism that pits Americans against one another.
Thus far the only defense (non-defense) of Obama's positions and statements is to distort McCain.
You can't defend or reasonably debate Obama's plan to withdraw immediately despite progress and you can't defend his 'Bittergate' statements, so you resort to mischaracterizing and distorting McCain's comments and attacking his age.
We all need to do what the right wing did for so long to the media: constantly complain when the coverage is perceived as biased.
The far right has beaten so many in the media into submission; we need to reverse that.
He came back ok but shortly after he first went, there was an attack on his camp in Basra and 5 soldiers died. For days, we could not get through to him and as the army had not released the names of the dead, there was plenty of time to let your mind wander onto the worst 'what-if' scenarios.
When I worked in the media, I also interviewed several fellow Barbadians who had been to Iraq qith either the British or American armies.
One of the things that has enraged me about this war is how since it has started the British in particular ramped up their recruitment efforts in their former colonies - in places like St.Vincent, St. Lucia, Jamaica and Fiji. According to my ex, there are many more soldiers from these countries now than there were when he joined the army in 2000.
These ... Brits (restraint) have been deliberately targeting young black Caribbean men in poor, developing countries, offering them the bait of British residency if we come and fight in their war.
Why? The British haven't sucked enough out of the Caribbean over the course of 300-odd years or so?
Why target our young men? For a war that has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with the Caribbean? It is so patently obvious that they are capitalising on the poverty and lack of opportunity that exists in many islands and the fact that many people jump at the opportunity to get residency in the North because of the greater economic opportunities there.
It disgusts me.
1. Why is Iraq OUR responsibility? Did the Iraqis ask us to be responsible for them?
Please defend the position of staying in Iraq and getting more of our sons and daughters killed, wounded and maimed for life and spending TRILLIONS of US tax dollars in Iraq.
We need to cut and run from stay the course. Staying the course is getting our troops killed, wounded and maimed for life. Staying the course is bleeding our country dry.
Embracing defeat for political gain? Whatever, bring our troops home. They are sitting ducks in a shooting gallery.
What is the F$%king job in Iraq? does anybody know?
Our brave troops didn't volunteer and enlist to protect and defend Iraq, they volunteered and enlisted in the United States Military to protect and defend AMERICA.
Bring Em Home! Send all the Bush and McSame as Bush supporters to stay the course in Iraq for 100 years.