McCain Warns Of ‘Hard Struggle’ On The ‘Iraq-Pakistan Border’
From Talk Progress via Artios…
Today on Good Morning America, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) refused to call the situation in Afghanistan “precarious and urgent,” but admitted that “We have a lot of work to do.” He warned of a “very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border.”
I think this country is tired of dumb Presidents. I am anyway.
Did he misspeak, or is he geographically challenged?
Did he misspeak, or is he geographically challenged?
Neither, senility setting in, signs of dementia
It takes one to know one lol
Yeah it would suck if our president thought there were 57 states or that he could serve 8-10 years or something.
889th out of 894 class ranking at Annapolis. Where do the Republicans find all these dim bulb legacies?
The one we’ve got now is not only dumb but also brain damaged from substance abuse.
The one they want us to elect next is dumb and senile.
Sheesh!
You know what’s funny? A lot (not all) of conservatives bemoan public education, harping on the problem of black kids not getting good grades because they don’t want to “act white”.
Amazing how they then turn around and mock intillec-chew-als every chance they get.
Too funny Rebecca…………..but so true
“Judgement, Leadership…”
More than Bush lite…Bush the C student, McMad the D student….this country can’t stand another 4 years of dimwits.
Bush the alcohol/drug addict, McMad the boozer, womanizer…militarist.
What’s funny is you’ll question McCain’s leadership when Obama began running for President almost immediately upon becoming a U.S. Senator and he has not had ONE legislative accomplishment during his tenure in the Senate. Not one. If you worked for several years and had absolutely nothing to show for it I wouldn’t consider you qualified for much of anything, especially not to be President.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquer…arack))+01763))
The only 2 bills that passed which were sponsored/co-sponsored by Obama were
Senate Resolution 516 : A resolution recognizing the historical significance of Juneteenth Independence Day and expressing the sense of the Senate that history should be regarded as a means for understanding the past and solving the challenges of the future.
Senate Resolution 291: A resolution to congratulate the Chicago White Sox on winning the 2005 World Series Championship.
Boy, what an extensive laundry list of legislative accomplishments as a Senator.
Nice GOP talking pointMike, but it fails to
a) refute the fact that mcCain is a dummy. and
b) have anything to do with reality.
..and that is just the US Senate. He also did great things as a member of the Ill.
My greatest fear is the Australian imigrants illegally tunneling into Greenland.
…State Senate.
That might be too much reality for you to digest in one sitting – so take your time.
I think that the hard struggle on the Iraq/Pakistan border is that is runs right through Czechoslovakia.
ROTFLMAO…. this, from the guy who yawned at The Messiah’s invocation of a super-eight year presidential term the other day. Nice Harvard Law education, huh? And who clamored about McCain for his saying “Czechslovakia” (like Sam Nunn recently did, BTW).
You’re sure an entertaining catharthis, micro-brain. That’s about all ….
Via Matt Yglesias:
Map of the Border.
“If you worked for several years and had absolutely nothing to show for it I wouldn’t consider you qualified for much of anything, especially not to be President.”
Hey, wait…I thought you said you were in law school. 😉
So many stupid things said by this Old man it’s not even worth a comment.
“Hey, wait…I thought you said you were in law school. ”
Nope, not in law school.
Sorry, must have the wrong person. A McCain Moment?
Gee, that kind of reminds me of the time Obama said Hillary did well in Kentucky because it borders Arkansas. I guess he forgot it doesn’t border Arkansas. It does, however, border Illinois.
Thanks for that list – again – Jason. It’s really great that Obama knows how to throw his name on a bill that someone has already done the legwork on…kind of like he did in Illinois throughout his state senate career. How many pieces of legislation has he actually written, championed or fought tooth-and-nail to put through? When has he taken the lead on anything? He is a show pony. He brings the glitz and the glamor and the pretty smile. McCain is a workhorse. He may not be pretty or particularly eloquent, but he’s got integrity and principles and he knows what it means to do the right thing – even if he has to defy his party to do it.
Dom you poor thing. Still fighting the good fight eh?
Dominque… if the job of “Jensen’s sidekick” comes up… apply for it. He could have great fun pretending you were his liberal counterpoint.
“He may not be pretty or particularly eloquent, but he’s got integrity and principles and he knows what it means to do the right thing – even if he has to defy his party to do it.”
This is a nice fantasy, but it doesn’t line up well with a guy who is setting records for how fast he flips and flops on issues.
Indeed, you haven’t really addressed the fact that, unlike Obama’s one-time slips of the tongue, McCain said this more than once, just as he said the Iranians were training al Qaeda in Iraq multiple times.
The same was true of Hillary with the sniper fire — she said it many times, as part of her standard stump speech, for weeks. In her case, it might have been faulty memory; it was, after all, more than a decade ago. But of course people were eager to believe she was lying.
Given McCain’s age, he looks better if he’s lying than if he’s losing his marbles. Better venal than vacant.
Yes, Jason. Still fighting the good fight. I will continue to call him out for the fraud he is regardless of what happens in the election. Pity yourself, dear, not me. I didn’t throw money at a candidate who decided to flip off his donors the second he got the nomination.
I couldn’t be happier. I don’t have a horse in the race so I can sit back and watch from the sidelines without the stress that you poor dears will endure with every poll and gaffe. I barely even watch the news anymore. It’s like an anvil was lifted from my chest.
I’m fine regardless of what happens in November. Even if he wins, I can spend at least four more years poking fun at you guys as he falls on his face and you continue to make excuses for him.
So, again, what were the many pieces of legislation that he spearheaded and rammed through congress? I’m sure with his rich legislative record there must be been tons of them.
I’ll take vacant any day over venal AND vacant, which is what you have in Senator Obama.
Your obsession is not healthy. I’ll worry about you if you think it would do any good. Otherwise I’ll be going back to ignoring your lunatic ravings.
Okay?
BTW, I’m not backing McCain because I think he has an incredibly sharp mind or he’s particularly eloquence (clearly). I don’t give a shit if he finished at the bottom of his class. I’ve met a lot of uneducated people who are smart and a lot of very well-educated people who are stupid. I see proof of it on these websites every single day.
I’m backing him because I think he has a spine and I think he is willing to fight for what he believes in – even if it’s not the popular thing to do. Those qualities may not be important to you, but they are to me. Sorry, but I just don’t see those qualities in Obama at all.
Jason, you’re so precious when you’re trying to be condescending. Yes, sweetie. We’re all lunatics if we don’t agree with you. Whatever. Ignore away.
Dom,
Done.
Al,
This video contains that McCain BS, along with these other gems:
> his claim that he walked the street in Iraq without body armor and
>the claim that Gen Patreus drives in Iraq without an up-armored Humvee and
>the claim that he he never said “I know alot less about economics…I still need ot be educated” and
>the claim that “we are better off now than we were 8 years ago.
Along with footage of him claiming the exact opposite of everything he previously claimed.
Youtube
Al –
Look, a whole You Tube page of Obama gaffes!
http://youtube.com/results?search_query=%27obama+gaffe%27&search_type=&aq=f
Dom,
Ugh… Vote for Hillary, jesus. McCain is such a clown. I don’t understand how you can’t see that. He is such a f-ing clown. I tend to agree with you in regards to Obama; I don’t think I’m voting for him, but christ McCain? Seriously?
Every day you come off like such a loser, trying so hard to show that your NOT part of the Obama crowd. Being such a committed contributor to the Delaware blogosphere, it is your duty to present your argument against Obama for us, the uninformed, to digest, regardless if Jason or Nancy or Al or DHB (list continues for a while) writes you off. You sound like such a Hillary Whiner. It’s a shame, cause your intelligent. I want to hear why or why not I should vote for Obama, not how “poking fun at you guys” is the consolation prize.
Christ, I sound needy. Time for another beer.
Being such a committed contributor to the Delaware blogosphere, it is your duty to present your argument against Obama for us, the uninformed
*
Think Mrs. Marshall really gives a shit? I don’t. But I welcome her taking the bait.
And don’t lie about not having a horse in the race! You are riding that pony as hard as ever. *sigh* witness your lame DWA performances of late.
Call It, et tu? Think what you want. I am nothing if not honest and I can tell you unequivocally that this is in no way about Hillary. It is about a real distaste for what Obama represents (to me, at least) – the commercialized packaging of a sub-standard candidate; the embodiment of the media’s desperate desire to have another juggernaut political figure like JFK or MLK. Christ, it’s their meme every time a democrat under the age of 50 runs – He’s like JFK! It’s Camelot!! OMG and Barack is black AND he gives rousing speeches so we can combine both of these great icons into one!!! Only it couldn’t be further from the truth (except for the fact that JFK was probably almost as overrated as Obama). Yes, he gives a great speech, but that’s where it ends. Have any of you actually listened to him stammer through an interview? Uhh…umm…ya know? Ugh.
As far as McCain is concerned, I certainly don’t love him. I’m not passionate in any way about his candidacy, but I don’t think he’s evil or inept or a ‘clown’. I don’t think he’d be another Bush term. I think of two of them he would do the least damage. Unfortunately, that’s the choice I have to make once again this election year. Sorry, I don’t buy into the whole ‘write-in’ thing. It’s a waste. IMO, you either vote to get someone into office or to try to keep someone out.
Nancy –
Where have you been? I’ve missed you! Just last night I mentioned to Jack that I hadn’t seen you comment in ages. Welcome back!
You’re absolutely right. I don’t give a shit. I would hardly characterize myself as a ‘committed contributor to the Delaware blogosphere’. I’m only planning to stick around until Mat comes back (November). There’s an end in sight, kids! I have never been much more than a sometimes-passionate observer of politics. I’m nowhere near as into it as the rest of you. I commend your political activism, though. I really mean that. I’m constantly amazed that you guys manage to find the time to become so involved in the political process.
“This is a nice fantasy, but it doesn’t line up well with a guy who is setting records for how fast he flips and flops on issues.”
Pot, meet kettle. I have never seen a politician flip-flop as much as Obama has. People made fun of Kerry for flip-flopping, but Obama has brought it to a new level. Not to mention I can’t stand how everytime there’s criticism of his wife the Obama’s play the victim card and act like conservatives are being “mean” and “unfair”
Look. Obama’s wife is a socialist nutjob. She was putting herself out there speaking in public. Start talking policy, especially crazy talk like she does and people are going to call you out on it. Playing the “strong black woman” one minute and the “poor little black woman” victim/race card the next is just disgusting.
Dom and I may disagree on guns, but it looks like we’re on the same page on Obama. I REALLY dislike the guy.
“I think of two of them he would do the least damage. Unfortunately, that’s the choice I have to make once again this election year. Sorry, I don’t buy into the whole ‘write-in’ thing. It’s a waste. IMO, you either vote to get someone into office or to try to keep someone out.”
Dom – You’re right. I don’t like McCain either, but I’ll vote for him because I know where Obama stands, and the last thing this country needs is a FDR/Carter/Neville Chamberlain hybrid who can also pull the race card whenever anyone criticizes him.
I certainly hope the lovely Dominique sticks around.
Dom and I may disagree on guns, but it looks like we’re on the same page on Obama.
Case closed.
I have to agree with Dom that McCain has more moral and physical courage than Obama. Obama moral courage in standing up for his 20 year minister droppped real fast once that minister said that Obama is just a Chicago politician.
Obama physical courage has not been tested. So I do agree that McCain has steel and Obama does not. Voters to tend to vote on character not principles.
Obama arrogance has been stunning and starting to PO his supporters. I wondered if the super delegates and media will regret pushing Obama over Hillary.
“Moral and physical courage.”
“McCain has steel.”
“I don’t think he’d be another Bush term. I think of two of them he would do the least damage.”
“I’m backing him because I think he has a spine and I think he is willing to fight for what he believes in – even if it’s not the popular thing to do. ”
Love all the touchy-feely stuff, but could you guys provide some concrete examples of policy or issues? You claim Obama is all fluff, but from where I’m standing McCain is all adjectives!
Hey Pandora —
See concrete examples of McCain policy and issues. There are 66 of them and they are all flip-flops. The election season is still early, but no doubt this list is certainly not complete.
At least Dom and Mike W. make sense. The slobbering over Barack Obama is bizarre and amazing.
Good God, Cassandra. At least McCain has a record. And frankly, a guy deciding he didn’t want to kick the Russians out of the G8 isn’t a big problem for me. What is a big problem for me is Obama insisting he was still right about the surge while talking about what a marvelous job the surge has done.
Sharon,
If you could point out one thing that they’ve said that makes sense I’d be in your debt.
I read nothing except the forlorned howls of desperate losers.
Oh and one more thing, Maybe you can explain this to me.
When did having a comand of the English language become a political liability? it seems to me that being able to express yourself in English would be kind of a minimal requirement for someone seeking to be the President of the United States.
To read some commnets around here, you’d think that being able to speak in complete sentences is an unforgivable sin.
Obama arrogance has been stunning and starting to PO his supporters.
I’m a supporter and I don’t see any arrogance, just competence and drive.
Why not just use the word you want to use: “uppity”
You don’t consider Obama & Michelle elitist hypocrites?
So Sharon, why not just say you grade McCain on a curve? Because being grateful for a 66-item long flip-flopping record means that you selection standards for the CEO of the Free World are pretty darned low to start with.
But then, you likely voted for the GWB failure. Twice.
You don’t consider Obama & Michelle elitist hypocrites?
Here’s a few examples of their hypocrisy.
http://anothergunblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/left-is-really-starting-to-piss-me-off.html
The question you should be asking yourself is: “What has McCain supported without later on contradicting his own stated position?”
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/flipflops
National Security Policy
1. McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
2. McCain insisted that everyone, even “terrible killers,” “the worst kind of scum of humanity,” and detainees at Guantanamo Bay, “deserve to have some adjudication of their cases,” even if that means “releasing some of them.” McCain now believes the opposite.
3. He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”
4. In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
5. McCain was for closing the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay before he was against it.
6. When Barack Obama talked about going after terrorists in Pakistani mountains with predators, McCain criticized him for it. He’s since come to the opposite conclusion.
Foreign Policy
7. McCain was for kicking Russia out of the G8 before he was against it.
8. McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.
9. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.
10. McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.
11. McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
12. McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
13. McCain was against divestment from South Africa before he was for it.
Military Policy
14. McCain recently claimed that he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”
15. McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions, concluding, on multiple occasions, that a Korea-like presence is both a good and a bad idea.
16. McCain was against additional U.S. forces in Afghanistan before he was for it.
17. McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
18. McCain has repeatedly said it’s a dangerous mistake to tell the “enemy” when U.S. troops would be out of Iraq. In May, McCain announced that most American troops would be home from Iraq by 2013.
19. McCain was against expanding the GI Bill before he was for it.
Domestic Policy
20. McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
21. McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.
22. McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.
23. He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party’s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.
24. In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
25. McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
26. McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
27. McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.
28. McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
29. McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.
30. McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
31. In 2005, McCain endorsed intelligent design creationism, a year later he said the opposite, and a few months after that, he was both for and against creationism at the same time.
32. McCain opposed gay adoption before his campaign concluded he didn’t really mean it.
33. In the Senate, McCain opposed a variety of measures on equal pay for women, and endorsed the Supreme Court’s Ledbetter decision. In July, however, McCain said, “I’m committed to making sure that there’s equal pay for equal work. That … is my record and you can count on it.”
34. McCain was against fully funding the No Child Left Behind Act before he was for it.
Economic Policy
35. McCain was against Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy before he was for them.
36. John McCain initially argued that economics is not an area of expertise for him, saying, “I’m going to be honest: I know a lot less about economics than I do about military and foreign policy issues; I still need to be educated,” and “The issue of economics is not something I’ve understood as well as I should.” He now falsely denies ever having made these remarks and insists that he has a “very strong” understanding of economics.
37. McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal. And soon after that, McCain abandoned his second position and went back to his first.
38. McCain said in 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and falsely argued that he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
39. McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
40. McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
41. McCain has changed his entire economic worldview on multiple occasions.
42. McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off economically than they were before Bush took office.
Energy Policy
43. McCain supported the moratorium on coastal drilling ; now he’s against it.
44. McCain recently announced his strong opposition to a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
45. McCain endorsed a cap-and-trade policy with a mandatory emissions cap. In mid-June, McCain announced he wants the caps to voluntary.
46. McCain explained his belief that a temporary suspension of the federal gas tax would provide an immediate economic stimulus. Shortly thereafter, he argued the exact opposite.
47. McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.
48. McCain was for national auto emissions standards before he was against them.
Immigration Policy
49. McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.
50. On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own bill.
51. In April, McCain promised voters that he would secure the borders “before proceeding to other reform measures.” Two months later, he abandoned his public pledge, pretended that he’d never made the promise in the first place, and vowed that a comprehensive immigration reform policy has always been, and would always be, his “top priority.”
Judicial Policy and the Rule of Law
52. McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.
53. McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.
54. McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.
Campaign, Ethics, and Lobbying Reform
55. McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.
56. In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
57. McCain supported a campaign-finance bill, which bore his name, on strengthening the public-financing system. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.
Politics and Associations
58. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist John Hagee. Now he doesn’t. (He also believes his endorsement from Hagee was both a good and bad idea.)
59. McCain wanted political support from radical televangelist Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.
60. McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.
61. McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.
62. McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.
63. In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
64. McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
65. McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
66. McCain believed powerful right-wing activist/lobbyist Grover Norquist was “corrupt, a shill for dictators, and (with just a dose of sarcasm) Jack Abramoff’s gay lover.” McCain now considers Norquist a key political ally.
I believe the psychological term is called “Projection”.
So, in other words, mike, You Got Nuthin’.
Come back when you do, ok?
If you could point out one thing that they’ve said that makes sense I’d be in your debt.
1. The whole gun control thread.
2. “It is about a real distaste for what Obama represents (to me, at least) – the commercialized packaging of a sub-standard candidate; the embodiment of the media’s desperate desire to have another juggernaut political figure like JFK or MLK. Christ, it’s their meme every time a democrat under the age of 50 runs – He’s like JFK! It’s Camelot!! OMG and Barack is black AND he gives rousing speeches so we can combine both of these great icons into one!!! ”
3. “It’s really great that Obama knows how to throw his name on a bill that someone has already done the legwork on…kind of like he did in Illinois throughout his state senate career. How many pieces of legislation has he actually written, championed or fought tooth-and-nail to put through?”
There’s 3 just off the top of my head. As to the argument that good speech makes up for idiotic policies, lots of politicians can speak with a teleprompter. The news reader for the local station can do that. But when left on his own, Obama either stammers or says stupid things that have to be corrected in minutes (one Jerusalem, meeting with dictators, “57 states,” Kentucky borders Arkansas, bitter Pennsylvanians, etc., etc.).
Look, you like the pre-packaged, new and improved Obama. You’ll say whatever you have to to defend him, that’s obvious. But this guy said he STILL would have voted against the surge, not because it didn’t work, but because George W. Bush wanted it. That to me is disgusting, stupid, and shallow. But hey, it is Obama.
You don’t consider Obama & Michelle elitist hypocrites?
No. I consider John & Cindy to be elitist hypocrites. There is much more evidence for that viewpoint.
What definition of “elitist” are you working with here, that defines Obama as more of an elitist than McCain?
So Sharon, why not just say you grade McCain on a curve?
So, Cassandra, why not just admit that you didn’t bother grading Obama but just passed him anyway?
C’mon Sharon — you are the one defending a 66 item long flip flop record as something honorable and trustworthy.
You can make your case or you can’t.
Sharon –
Don’t be a hater. It doesn’t work and it will eat you up inside.
I can tell you that from bitter experience. I spent the last 8 years hating on Bush and Castle and all it got me was an ulcer and this blog.
Instead, come up with some affirmative arguments for your guy. If you can…
The whole ‘elitism’ label is such a fucking joke, I don’t know how you guys type it with a straight face!
I’ll admit that a person who is truly an ‘elitist’ does not have to be born wealthy, but the term is used by the McCain/HRC diehard supporters without qualification.
Was it the clinging to guns and religion section of a vast statement made about poorer folks voting against their economic interests all the while losing confidence in their government?
Well if that’s the case, then we are all elitists since what was stated above is an accepted reason of the rise of religious fundamentalism within the Islamic world. Let us not forget about our ‘christian’ brothers of Sinn Fein too!
Is Obama confident or cocky? An elitist or a leader? Do you truly know what words mean, even in a colloquial sense?
I’ll tell you this though…the people who use these terms, such as cocky, elitist, disingenuous, without empirical evidence of such behavior, are usually intimidated and/or frightened by recipient of their scorn.
McCain actually offered to forgo Secret Service protection when he came to the NRA convention in May, although the Secret Service didn’t allow it.
Obama on the otherhand actively works to keep his constituents in Chicago & Illinois disarmed while he and his family have 24/7 armed security.
http://anothergunblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-says-he-believes-in-2nd-amendment.html
I’d call this a flip-flop, not to mention disgusting coming from a “constitutional law professor.” The man also uses the term “grant” when discussing Constitutional rights, when the Constitution doesn’t “grant” any rights.
http://www.sportsmenforobama.org/content/view/74/
Watch that video
The 1996 questionnaire with his handwritten notes on it where he supported the following.
-Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
-Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
-Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.”
Disavowed. Says he never filled it out.
He’s not beholden to “special interests” – Oh sure, that’s why he served on the Board of Directors for the Anti-gun Joyce Foundation.
http://www.joycefdn.org/pdf/98_AnnualReport.pdf
Obama panders to the pro-gun crowd when he served on the Joyce Foundation board of directors, which is a well-known anti-gun group.
http://www.joycefdn.org/pdf/98_AnnualReport.pdf
That’s like a KKK member saying he’s going to stand up for the civil rights of blacks. It shouldn’t be taken as anything other than a straight up lie.
Obama believes that gun manufacturers should be held liable for criminal misuse of their products. This is profoundly moronic from a legal & common sense perspective.
http://obama.senate.gov/news/050729-gunmakers_may_get_suit-proof_vest/
Some more hypocrisy
http://anothergunblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-says-he-believes-in-2nd-amendment.html
Oh, and this man and his family have 24/7 armed security, yet he actively denies his constituents in Chicago & illinois the same means of self-defense. He’s also advocated a FEDERAL ban on CCW for everyone but police, gov. agents, and retired police. That’s not elitist?
He used blatant christian symbolism in an ad, but when Huckabee did it there was an uproar.
http://anothergunblog.blogspot.com/2008/05/obama-and-faith.html
He dismissed midwest values as “economically enduced bitterness.
Profoundly Moronic?
There you go with the name calling again. Just because I happen to disagree with you on product liability does not mean I’m moronic. Once you get into the personal attacks I am disinclined to take you seriously.
Have you learned nothing?
Von – you guys are experts at projection. I saw a full-fledged display of it by DE Liberal folks in the gun threads.
C’mon Sharon — you are the one defending a 66 item long flip flop record as something honorable and trustworthy.
I didn’t defend his flip-flops, but I find them far less disturbing than the shell game Obama is running. Although it’s pretty funny watching you guys avoid his comments about the surge.
Here’s what I like about John McCain: judges and the war. I like a candidate who says he’ll nominate judges who aren’t going to make shit up like the Warren court did. Justices who aren’t going to suddenly discover “hidden” rights in the Constitution that, amazingly, no one saw for 200+ years.
I like McCain’s stance on the war. It’s really quite simple: you leave when it is stable and we can. This isn’t the “100 years in Iraq” misinterpretation you guys engaged in. And al-Maliki needs to sound tough for his own ppl, which is why saying, “Yeah, get out!” doesn’t hold much weight. And, honestly, how can you support Obama’s timetable when he was against–and still is against–the surge that provided the cover?
I like the idea of making the president’s tax cuts permanent because the govt doesn’t need to be digging deeper into anyone’s pockets.
I like a president who is pro-life, not one who voted to allow babies born from abortion to die.
And, frankly, I like a candidate who, when he does change positions, changes to a position closer to his base, rather than running away from it like Barack Obama.
The only Democrats who get elected president are those who lie and say they are conservative. Obama knows that, too.
Allowing people to sue a gun manufacturer because someone misused their product is like suing Miller Brewing Co. because some drunk killed someone in a traffic accident, or suing Benchmade because someone got stabbed with one of their pocketknives.
Name one other consumer product where you can sue the manufacturer because of injury caused by a non-defective product that was misused.
You’ve got to be bereft of all common sense to believe a manufacturer should be open to liability lawsuits because certain people misuse their product. Do you really think it’s OK for people to be able to sue the manufacturers of any product someone uses to harm someone else?
This is hilarious.
Here’s what I like about John McCain: judges and the war. I like a candidate who says he’ll nominate judges who aren’t going to make shit up like the Warren court did. Justices who aren’t going to suddenly discover “hidden” rights in the Constitution that, amazingly, no one saw for 200+ years.
If the “Unitary Executive” theory that Bush has foisted on us through the courts is not something that has been “discovered” by the courts than I don’t know what is.
You guys never cease to amaze with the willful blindness – AND the ability to use that very blindness as a strength.
Anyway – keep on trucking. I’m sure there is family somewhere that loves you in spite of everything.
Not all, Mike.
Guns might be the most pertinent, divisive issue we face, but most here do not advocate total banishment, just restriction.
I’ll give you Bush’s tax cuts on payroll if a carbon tax is levied.
How else are we going to pay down our debt, including the debt that’s currently “off the books” for financing Bush’s war?
Read up on Obama’s “Global Poverty Act.” He wants to throw .7% of our GDP at quite possibly the most corrupt multinational governmental entity ever created. As if pouring more money into Africa and other 3rd world countries will help things. That’s just more of the same shit that hasn’t worked for decades.
Also, This is socialism – Again, lets just throw money at the problem.
“The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”
-Michelle Obama
http://anothergunblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/michelle-obama-has-thing-for-pie.html
If the “Unitary Executive” theory that Bush has foisted on us through the courts is not something that has been “discovered” by the courts than I don’t know what is.
The Unitary Executive theory has not been embraced by the courts, Jason. It is a theory that the Bush administration has used to defend various actions.
The difference is between what the executive branch has argued and what the courts have declared. It wasn’t the executive branch that gave us Roe v. Wade, among other things. And it wasn’t the unitary executive who declared, as you are well aware, that governments can confiscate your property because someone else will pay more taxes from it.
Uh, Sharon, the Kelo decision was a product of this SCOTUS. So blame your buddy Scalia.
As for the rest of your list of preferences, OK, you’re not a liberal. So what are you doing here? Just looking for an argument?
Afraid someone might disrupt your echo chamber with a reasoned argument Al?
True, Mike, regarding M. Obama’s quote…but it’s not unconstitutional.
Socialism is a vast measure of the economic spectrum, where the poles are pure Capitalism and pure Communism. Everything else is Socialism.
We’re all socialists; it’s the degree of socialism with which you have an issue, and that’s fine. But it’s certainly not un-American if democratically elected representatives pass ‘Socialist’ policies, especially if it’s based on the will of People.
And the only repubs that get elected are those who lie and say they are “compassionate conservatives” and that we won’t be doing any nation building.
And, honestly, how can you support Obama’s timetable when he was against–and still is against–the surge that provided the cover?
And this is just drinking the kool-aid, Sharon. The point of the surge was to both tamp down on the violence and the provide some room for the Iraqis to make some political progress. As far as the violence is concerned, much of that calmed down once al-Sadr declared his cease fire; once we started paying resistance Sunnis to stop resisting us; and once the multiple factions fighting each other on the ground finished remaking the ethnogeography of the country ( of which may tens of thousands were forced to move AND many tens of thousands are still real refugees); and as we built a bunch of walled communities in Baghdad to keep these ethnofactions in their places. In the meantime, deBaathification and other target legislation is largely undone or unimplemented.
While more troops on the ground probably helped the Sunnis be convinced to take the money and run and to keep some of the factions from total ethnic cleansing while their neighborhoods segregated, the real issues here still remain. And the biggest of those issues is that there is still little reason for all of those factions to put aside their self-interests for a greater national one.
Your comment, of course, represents the sleight of hand that BushCo is trying to have on this issue — more troops=less violence and the story is more complex than that and some of that complexity would have happened without us. al-Maliki is for the Obama withdrawal plan because those are the real facts on the ground — we are seen as occupiers here and are not as useful on the ground as Fox News will pretend.
Frankly I am stunned at the real paternalism that you wingnuts have towards these Iraqis. They’ve been insisting for awhile (this is why there is no Status of Forces agreement) that there needs to be a planned withdrawal of troops and they are apparently backed up in this by their government and citizens. So why not let the democracy that you think got created there work?
If McCain knew something about wars he would have been a stronger advocated for completing the job in Afghanistan rather than going off on the Iraq boondoggle. And of this, McCain flip flopped in order to not be left behind by the Obama approach.
Grow up, Mike. Let me know when Sharon gets around to the “reasoned discussion.” I was addressing Sharon, who listed a long line of the things she prefers in a candidate. What’s the point of posting that at a liberal site? Nothing but seeking an argument, something you’ve been doing here for a week or more. What’s the point? Do you really think anyone’s mind is going to change? Are you just bored?
We get it. You like guns, you style yourself a libertarian — there are sites where you’ll find like-minded people, or “echo chambers” if you prefer. In my own experience, arguing with someone like you (or you arguing with me) is pissing up a rope, which I suppose is a fine pasttime if you don’t mind getting wet.
My gripe is your arguments are keeping the writers here from doing something more interesting with their time and effort.
But it was SCOTUS which decided to hear the case and adjudicate Bush v Gore.
If that’s not an example of ‘activist’ judges wanting to step outside the Constitution and inject personal preference, I don’t know what is!
You can’t have it both ways. I will say that the term ‘Activist Judges’ is redundant. It’s what judges do….as long as they stay within or logically and wisely expound our Constitutional Framework.
Bush v Gore did neither; it was a practice in disenfranchisement and unconstitutional.
As for the rest of your list of preferences, OK, you’re not a liberal. So what are you doing here? Just looking for an argument?
As a conservative, I like to listen to and read the opinions of others, including those with which I disagree. It’s a refreshing past time that you might try, Al.
I wrote my list of why I liked John McCain in response to someone who asked me for it. Otherwise, I was perfectly happy to sit back and punch holes in all the “Obama is great” arguments.
I have actually enjoyed reading this blog and linked to it from time to time. The variety of commentary is far more interesting than most of the echo chambers from the Left that I’ve found. It’s really sort of sad that you dislike the give and take of differing opinions.
Cassandra, I like your framing of the Iraq War. Of course, we have no idea what Iraq would have looked like without the change in strategy–including the surge–that Barack Obama opposed because it came from the Bush administration. Obama’s remarks are quite telling; if the suggestion had come from Democrats, he would have liked it. He disliked it because of its “politics,” i.e., he didn’t want to give the president a victory.
Your comment, of course, represents the sleight of hand that BushCo is trying to have on this issue — more troops=less violence and the story is more complex than that and some of that complexity would have happened without us. al-Maliki is for the Obama withdrawal plan because those are the real facts on the ground — we are seen as occupiers here and are not as useful on the ground as Fox News will pretend.
Two weekends ago, when al-Maliki made his first comments about withdrawal, I was listening to Morning Edition, a show that isn’t particularly Republican friendly, and the reporter then made the point that the Iraqi president said things such as this for local consumption, not necessarily for Americans. Call it the Iraqi version of Obama’s NAFTA statement.
It’s understandable that some Iraqis want Americans to go or view us as occupiers. But our decision to go to Iraq was based on our security. I know, I know, how nationalistic of me to assume our government fights wars for our interests. The democratization of Iraq is a pleasant outcome, but not the main reason we went there. When we have finished what we need to do there, we will leave.
As for Kelo, I know that was a decision from the Roberts court. It was also an illustration of the judiciary forcing its opinion on an unwilling public. This is wholly different from the unitary executive example given previously.
If that’s not an example of ‘activist’ judges wanting to step outside the Constitution and inject personal preference, I don’t know what is!
Well, the SCOTUS tried to gently reprimand the Florida Supreme Court, but that didn’t take. I didn’t particularly agree with the final decision in that case, but George Bush would have won, regardless. Unless, of course, Democrats continued cherry-picking which votes would count and which would not.
I will say that the term ‘Activist Judges’ is redundant. It’s what judges do….as long as they stay within or logically and wisely expound our Constitutional Framework.
Perhaps in a liberal mindset that is what judges do. It is definitely not what the founding fathers had in mind for the Supreme Court, nor what justices did for nearly 200 years. Then came 1937 and the Switch in Time that Saved 9. Voila! Activist judges were born. Now, it’s true, you may like certain sorts of activist judges and I like certain others. But I’m willing to bet that the sorts of activist judges I like tend to hew more closely to traditional Constitutional interpretation.
“The democratization of Iraq is a pleasant outcome, but not the main reason we went there. When we have finished what we need to do there, we will leave.”
Sharon, could you please tell me what we need to finish before we leave? What is victory? I keep asking this question and have yet to get a specific answer.
Pandora, you can’t get an answer because (I’ve seriously begun to suspect) nobody actually intends for us to leave, including Obama, who wants to leave US bases and security forces there even after we have “withdrawn” and who has yet to repudiate the oil contracts the State Dept extorted from the al Maliki govt
He disliked it because of its “politics,” i.e., he didn’t want to give the president a victory.
The “politics” is in kicking the can down the road — keeping a massive force of troops and supporting bases, while keeping Fox News ginned up for some nebulous “winning”. At one time, GWB told all of us that a successful democracy in Iraq was want the goal was. Although I can’t fault you for not knowing this since there have been so very many reasons why we went there. And not one of them is related to US security.
Obama has been pretty clear about disavowing permanent bases in Iraq and pretty clear that residual forces will be enough to protect Embassy staff and interests, to support training missions and some counter-terrorism functions. That is still a footprint, but that is NOT an occupying army footprint.
We would all like to be over and done completely with Iraq, but the plan for these residual forces is not unreasonable. But then, my way or the highway is not a path to governing.
‘Love all the touchy-feely stuff’
You know I love you, P, but c’mon, touchy-feely stuff is what got Obama to where he is.
Then give me some policy/issues, Dom. Surely you agree with McCain on most of the issues… if not then all you’re left with are adjectives.
BTW, who you gonna vote for if Obama picks Hillary as VP?
Also, you know I backed Obama with my eyes wide open. Do believe I always stated that he is a politician, a very good politician.
Cassandra –
I notice you really like to use the phrase ‘you wingnuts’. Has it ever occurred to you that you are a wingnut, too? You just happen to be from the opposite wing. Your complete inability to see absolutely any good in a Republican or bad in a Democrat makes you a certifiable wingnut.
It’s ok to admit that Republicans aren’t all evil and stupid. There are good people and good ideas on both sides of the aisle. Jesus. Sometimes it’s like trying to reason with a bunch of toddlers around here.
Of course not all Republicans are evil and stupid. But once you rule that out, what other character flaw could make them sign onto an evil and stupid philosophy?
Maybe they honestly believe in the good parts of the Republican philosophy. OK, fine. But haven’t they noticed that senior Republicans are no longer following the good parts of the Republican philosphy, and have in fact turned it into something evil?
So if you are a Republican who is not evil or stupid, but you have not noticed the subversion of the principles you have signed up for, that makes you…. what???
A Kool-aid drinker?
He will not pick Hillary as VP. He should, but he won’t. His ego will not allow it nor will most of his wingnut supporters (read: donors).
It’s a good question, tho. After our discussion a couple of weeks ago, I gave a lot of thought to what you said about your ultimate reason for supporting Obama: the fact that you didn’t have the strength to endure another eight years of Clinton bashing. Well, I think you’re right.
The primaries took a toll on me. I went in happy and full of hope and came out completely beaten down, demoralized and diminished (as a woman and as a Democrat). I don’t have the energy to do it again (tho I doubt even the Republicans could treat Hillary worse than the Dems did). So, to answer your question, if someone slips Obama a roofie and he picks Hillary, I’ll still vote for McCain.
Ouch!
Anon –
They’re not always right, but they know how to unify. Dems could learn a lot from them in terms of getting things done. I’ve often said Dem ideas combined with Republican resolve and tenacity would be a force to be reckoned with.
P –
BTW, in terms of your question about McCain policy, I don’t give a shit what either of their policies are. They’re just words. None of them vote in line with their stated policies. They usually end up somewhere in the middle.
Also, it wasn’t my ultimate reason for supporting Obama. I had decided I wasn’t up for defending the Clintons (again) months before Obama caught my attention. I started out in the Edwards’ camp.
Geez, Dom, don’t hold back. Tell me how you really feel! 😉
So Dom. let me see if I understand your Presidential preferences, in order:
1. Hillary
2. McCain
3. Carrot Top
4. Satan
…
99. Obama (provided Hell is also frozen over)
Do I detect a lack of understanding (or concern for) the candidates’s actual positions?
I believe she doesn’t give a shit. 😉
“They’re just words. None of them vote in line with their stated policies. They usually end up somewhere in the middle.”
Well if you look at the Obama’s record as a whole (and pre-campaign talk) he’s far left, even within a Democratic party that’s moved left in recent years.