11 June 2008
In All Fairness to McCain…
Posted by Joy Bischoff under: Presidential Election 2008 .
Here is a small clip of what the Democrats are saying about McCain. Compare that with the video of what McCain really said. Personally, I do not agree with long term occupation of Iraq but I want to be fair to Senator McCain and point out that the Dems are distorting his words.
Dems pound McCain for new Iraq quote
The Obama campaign and Democratic leaders accused Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) of being confused and heartless after he told NBC’s “Today” show Wednesday that it’s “not too important” when U.S. troops return from Iraq.
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) said on a quickly organized Obama conference call that McCain’s comment was “unbelievably out of touch with the needs and concerns of most Americans,” saying that to families of troops in harm’s way, “To them, it’s the most important thing in the world.”
Kerry claimed “an enormous, fundamental flaw in his candidacy for the presidency, which supposedly has hung on his strength as commander in chief and his understanding of foreign policy.”
Susan Rice, an Obama foreign-policy adviser, accused McCain of “a real disturbing, even disconcerting, pattern of confusing the basic facts and reality that pertain to Iraq.”
The “Today” show statement, which McCain went on to explain, is damaging because Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has pledged to immediately begin withdrawing combat troops.
20 Comments so far...
Pickles Says:
11 June 2008 at 12:56 pm.
Don’t care. Still don’t like him.
Jeezer Says:
11 June 2008 at 1:06 pm.
McCain is very ignorant about the Middle East. He has gotten a lot of facts wrong in the past so I am sick of hearing him called an expert. What he is missing here is that the Middle East will never be like those other countries for lots of reasons. Our soldiers will always be in harms way because of a little thing called suicide bombers. Get real.
Mac Says:
11 June 2008 at 1:11 pm.
I appreciate the fairness. McCain isn’t all bad guys.
E.E. Says:
11 June 2008 at 1:35 pm.
Here is what Robert Samuelson said in a column today and I totally agree with it: The trouble with McCain is that he often mistakes stubbornness for principle.
That said, however, I have to agree that the dems did not report the above story accurately and I guess we need to try and be fair.
Hawk Says:
11 June 2008 at 3:48 pm.
Thanks for putting up the video. I think McCain makes sense.
Benjamin Says:
11 June 2008 at 4:03 pm.
This is a very important article. They are not going to stand for our long term presence. This is no Japan or Germany. When will people realize that?
Iraqis Condemn American Demands
BAGHDAD, June 10 — High-level negotiations over the future role of the U.S. military in Iraq have turned into an increasingly acrimonious public debate, with Iraqi politicians denouncing what they say are U.S. demands to maintain nearly 60 bases in their country indefinitely.
Top Iraqi officials are calling for a radical reduction of the U.S. military’s role here after the U.N. mandate authorizing its presence expires at the end of this year. Encouraged by recent Iraqi military successes, government officials have said that the United States should agree to confine American troops to military bases unless the Iraqis ask for their assistance, with some saying Iraq might be better off without them.
“The Americans are making demands that would lead to the colonization of Iraq,” said Sami al-Askari, a senior Shiite politician on parliament’s foreign relations committee who is close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. “If we can’t reach a fair agreement, many people think we should say, ‘Goodbye, U.S. troops. We don’t need you here anymore.’ ”
Congress has grown increasingly restive over the negotiations, which would produce a status of forces agreement setting out the legal rights and responsibilities of U.S. troops in Iraq and a broader “security framework” defining the political and military relationship between the two countries. Senior lawmakers of both parties have demanded more information and questioned the Bush administration’s insistence that no legislative approval is required.
ad_icon
In Iraq, the willingness to consider calling for the departure of American troops represents a major shift for members of the U.S.-backed government. Maliki this week visited Iran, where Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader, urged him to reject any long-term security arrangements with the United States.
Failing to reach agreements this year authorizing the future presence of American forces in Iraq would be a strategic setback for the Bush administration, which says that such a presence is essential to promoting stability. Absent the agreements or the extension of the U.N. mandate, U.S. troops would have no legal basis to remain in Iraq.
President Bush has spoken directly to Maliki about the issue in recent days and instructed his negotiating team to show greater flexibility, Iraqi politicians said. U.S. officials circulated a draft of the status of forces agreement over the weekend without many of the most controversial demands, buoying hopes that a deal could be reached, according to Iraq lawmakers.
David M. Satterfield, the State Department’s top adviser on Iraq, said he is confident the pacts can be finalized in July, a deadline that Bush and Maliki endorsed last year. “It’s doable,” he told reporters in Baghdad. “We think it’s an achievable goal.”
U.S. officials have refused to publicly discuss details of the negotiations. But Iraqi politicians have become more open in their descriptions of the talks, stoking popular anger at American demands that Iraqis across the political spectrum view as a form of continued occupation.
“What the U.S. wants is to take the current status quo and try to regulate it in a new agreement. And what we want is greater respect for Iraqi sovereignty,” said Haider al-Abadi, a parliament member from Maliki’s Dawa party. “Signing the agreement would mean that the Iraqi government had given up its sovereignty by its own consent. And that will never happen.”
Joy Bischoff Says:
11 June 2008 at 5:38 pm.
Benjamin, I have no doubt at all that you are right. Middle Eastern Studies was my major and I closely studied the Muslim mindset and I know this will not work out. I try not to harp on it too much but every once in awhile I do come out and say it and I decided the article you posted would be a good reason to speak up again on the subject.
Ghost Says:
11 June 2008 at 6:28 pm.
I agree Joy.
Cavetrollhead Says:
12 June 2008 at 9:17 am.
Frankly, the only thing that I like about McCain is his War policy.
You don’t go into a country, kill many thousands of people and then create a power vacuum amid a ruthless enemy and leave to let GENOCIDE take place -just because you shouldn’t have gone in the first place. We created this mess and we’d better stay until it is cleaned up. That was the real lesson from Viet Nam. We caused the deaths of millions by leaving our mess, because we didn’t have the stomach to finish the job.
Just because we won’t spill the blood, it won’t make our hands clean.
Benjamin Says:
12 June 2008 at 9:22 am.
Cave, I think there must be some middle ground between leaving like we did in Nam, and having permanent bases there. I agree we need to clean up our mess but we have to hold the Iraqis accountable for making progress and getting ready to take back their country. It may take a few years but it shouldn’t be permanent because we would actually destabilize the country more that way. They see their land as sacred and permanent occupation would create a terrible uprising.
Cavetrollhead Says:
12 June 2008 at 6:11 pm.
Well thanks for the word Benjamin. Many times people just tolerate comments they don’t agree with and without response –or rip the commenter personally. So thanks for staying out of the lizard brain.
If you are saying that we can’t have bases there permanently because they hate Americans and that will just be a permanent antagonism, that is a good point. You may be right. I guess you and I agree for the most part. I just don’t think that we can underestimate the instability there and the consequence of pulling out prematurely. I don’t mind the Bush rhetoric because it starts the negotiating point on the safe side. If the U.S. give a bit on the permanent presence thing, then fine. But to leave entirely because the Iraqis have stepped up- disaster.
But McCain antagonists (I am one) too ofter make him an offender for a word. You remember when Quail called the kid in the spelling bee wrong because the card that Quail was holding had an alternate spelling? His political opponents called Quail dumb because he wasn’t a perfect speller. Like, again, people say Bush is dumb because of his pronunciation problems. Well when McCain gets a detail wrong here and there, or misspeaks, people do them same thing to him. The big picture is what is important here. McCain has been consistently right on the big picture. Anti-McCains are making him an offender for a word. It just makes the anti McCain sentiments seem petty while there are better reasons to oppose him then making him an offender for a word. It is diluting the better points.
(BTW Obama is flip flopping on this. He is suddenly saying that we should stay to provide for the security when he was saying to opposite to his base before he cinched the nomination. Now that he is going for a broader appeal, he is changing his song. McCain hasn’t done that.)
Cavetrollhead Says:
12 June 2008 at 6:13 pm.
I mis-spoke at the end of second paragraph. I meant to say “but to leave entirely BEFORE the Iraqis have COMPLETELY stepped up- disaster.”
Ghost Says:
12 June 2008 at 6:59 pm.
I agree with you guys. Hindsight is better than foresight. I was for the war and now I wish we had focused on Afghanistan and then clandestine operations to target terrorist organizations. But since we went in, we owe it to the Iraqi people to finish the job and help them get ready to take over.
I heard the same thing today about Obama changing his position on Iraq and lying about it. What a choice we are stuck with.
I do have to disagree about McCain’s intelligence. I think Bush is way smarter. McCain graduated fourth from the bottom on a graduating class that was a little under a thousand. Not impressive, and from what I have seen, he really isn’t that smart.
Cavetrollhead Says:
13 June 2008 at 12:48 am.
Yes I can’t help agree with you Ghost. He doesn’t seem too bright and his educational record doesn’t help. The thing is though, that nobody gets to where he is without a great capacity- either on his part or his permanent affiliates. So I am not worried about his mental capacity. I am worried about his character, and his knowledge on the issues. I feel he is way off on several important issues. And his public war record doesn’t impress me on his character. That was a long time ago and I am not sure if I believe the public record.
I have said it a hundred times.
1. McCain vs. Wisconsin right to life (Cronyism over principle)
2. McCain Feingold (stripping of freedom of speech)
3. McCain Kennedy (Soft on illegal immigration and hard on legal immigration)
4. McCain Lieberman (global warming gas tax.)
5 Dirty, dishonest campaigning
6. Wrost of all, combine the above with the fact that he is the REPUBLICAN nominee and you have the tearing away of the political power from conservatives in R. party. That might be worse than an Obama- Nation (but I doubt it.) Conservatives are no longer the base of the party, thanks to the McCain candidacy. I know - I am a broken record, but anyway, that is my focus and the other stuff is minutiae that only distracts from the important facts that I list here.
Lets hope his VP choice can make his cadidacy more encouraging.
avatar Says:
13 June 2008 at 3:27 am.
I was against invading Iraq, but we’re there now and have to find a graceful way to declare victory and leave. $2.7 billion dollars and four thousand American lives should be enough of a price for Americans to pay to give Iraqis a shot at democracy (assuming Iraqis even want democracy). The Democrats have been successful in portraying McCain as uncaring about the war, but as the clip shows, he’s probably just more realistic and honest. On this issue, it’s Obama who ignored reality when he said he would simply withdraw a few brigades each month. He can’t think it’s that easy and must know that kind of mechanical “staged withdrawal” would likely lead to a rout (once the remaining troops no longer had the manpower to operate effectively) followed by massacres and a civil war. Not exactly a graceful exit. Of course, it’s mainly rhetoric. Whoever wins the election is (I hope) going to be following the advice of the generals on how to transfer duties to the Iraqi forces and accomplish the withdrawal in an orderly manner.
Mac Says:
13 June 2008 at 9:05 am.
Although people here don’t agree on some of the details, with a couple of exceptions most of us agree on the general ideas and I think we do a pretty good job of being logical. It gives me hope that there is still intelligence left in the country and we might find a way to pull through the mess we are in.
HerculesMulligan Says:
13 June 2008 at 9:14 pm.
John McCain is just like all the other politicians — they just spout off “feel-good” talk. I don’t like McCain or Obama — they are both politicians, they are both demagogues, they are both “feel-goodies,” they are both wrong.
I am sorry that Ron Paul is officially not running anymore. If he is still on the ballot, I intend to write him in. 
All the other candidates are a disgrace to the name “American.”
Please pardon my candor, but I think I’m right.
Cavetrollhead Says:
13 June 2008 at 9:23 pm.
Good point Avatar,
Whoever wins is probably going to be pragmatic and they will follow the generals’ advice.
Then again in Viet Nam, we left a massacre in our wake that cost millions of lives and immeasurable suffering, so maybe the won’t be reasonable now if they weren’t then. Also I don’t think Obama will put America first. He scares the devil out of me.
avatar Says:
14 June 2008 at 12:28 am.
I like to think the Vietnam exit would have worked out differently if we hadn’t been mired in Watergate. But, who knows?
Jesse Says:
14 June 2008 at 12:40 am.
Hi Hercules, haven’t seen you around for awhile. I will probably write in Ron Paul too. I have been kind of down since Thursday. Ron is a man of integrity and there aren’t many of those in politics.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.