- ‹ previous
- 4049 of 8907
- next ›
McCain in NH: Would Be "Fine" To Keep Troops in Iraq for "A Hundred Years"
The United States military could stay in Iraq for "maybe a hundred years" and that "would be fine with me," John McCain told two hundred or so people at a town hall meeting in Derry, New Hampshire, on Thursday evening. Toward the end of this session, which was being held shortly before the Iowa caucuses were to start, McCain was confronted by Dave Tiffany, who calls himself a "full-time antiwar activist." In a heated exchange, Tiffany told McCain that he had looked at McCain's campaign website and had found no indication of how long McCain was willing to keep U.S. troops in Iraq. Arguing that George W. Bush's escalation of troops has led to a decline in U.S. casualties, McCain noted that the United States still maintains troops in South Korea and Japan. He said he had no objection to U.S. soldiers staying in Iraq for decades, "as long as Americans are not being injured, harmed or killed."
After the event ended, I asked McCain about his "hundred years" comment, and he reaffirmed the remark, excitedly declaring that U.S. troops could be in Iraq for "a thousand years" or "a million years," as far as he was concerned. The key matter, he explained, was whether they were being killed or not: "It's not American presence; it's American casualties." U.S. troops, he continued, are stationed in South Korea, Japan, Europe, Bosnia, and elsewhere as part of a "generally accepted policy of America's multilateralism." There's nothing wrong with Iraq being part of that policy, providing the government in Baghdad does not object.
In other words, McCain does not equate victory in Iraq--which he passionately urges at campaign events--with the removal of U.S. troops from that nation. After McCain told Tiffany that he could see troops remaining in Iraq for a hundred years, a reporter sitting next to me quipped, "There's the general election campaign ad." He meant the Democratic ad: John McCain thinks it would be okay if U.S. troops stayed in Iraq for another hundred years.....
Well, it was straight talk. And McCain's combativeness livened up a session during which he alternated between the old McCain (as in punchy, feisty, humorous) and the old McCain (as in just plain old). He moved a bit stiffly on the stage set up in the middle of the Adams Memorial Opera House. And he--somewhat oddly--shared the spotlight with Senator Joseph Lieberman, who has endorsed him. Lieberman did not merely introduce McCain; he stood by McCain during the entire event, helping McCain to answer questions about education, climate change, and the Iraq war. Several times, Lieberman gave more coherent and animated replies than did McCain. Repeatedly, Lieberman maintained that McCain could rack up bipartisan successes as president. (The Lieberman sidekick bit was curious. But an elementary-age girl in the audience did say, after being handed a microphone, that Lieberman was her role-model and that she fancied McCain. Lieberman hugged her, and the whole crowd oohed at this cuteness.)
Update: Video after the jump.
McCain has been coming on strong in New Hampshire, where he beat George W. Bush by 18 points in the 2000 Republican primary. (Some polls place him in the lead.) Eight years ago, McCain thrived as an independent-minded GOPer willing to blast the corruptions of Washington. These days, his stock appears to be rising because he has stuck with the Iraq war and boasts of years of national security experience. "If the world was stable, we could afford Mitt Romney as the national CEO," says a McCain campaign aide (who asks not to be identified). "But in an unsafe and unstable world, Republican voters, and some independents, are coming to see that we need a warrior in the White House." The crisis in Pakistan, this aide notes, was a timely reminder.
So McCain is not doing so bad for a candidate who was on life-support last summer. But it's not that he has craftily orchestrated his revival; the other campaigns have fallen flat. Romney has hard a tough time selling himself as a fellow ready to be commander in chief. Rudy Giuliani cast himself as Mr. 9/11--which is different from persuading voters you are Mr. Win the War. Fred Thompson, who highlighted the foreign policy experience he obtained on the Senate intelligence committee, has mounted a lackluster bid. Mike Huckabee has had little to say about national security and has gaffed too often on foreign policy. Regarding national security and the war, McCain has become the default Republican.
"The Mac is back," Lieberman exclaimed in Derry. Perhaps it's merely that McCain managed to stay on his feet while his rivals have faltered. In the next few days, McCain and his supporters will be pushing him as the Republican who is ready for wartime. This is a potent argument. But will it win over the New Hampshire independents who swooned over McCain in 2000? This slice of the electorate is not particularly fond of the war McCain champions. Michael Dennehy, McCain's political director, says that independents "will agree to disagree on the war with him if they think he's being honest." Well, with McCain boldly declaring he doesn't give a damn how long U.S. troops are deployed in Iraq, his strategists can certainly say he is not holding back. Whether that indeed impresses independents (and Republicans) in New Hampshire won't be known until this Tuesday.
That is how McCain was discovered to be alive and well in Hotel Hanoi, due to his wussing out
Sandy dear, if you have been follow Obama's voting record, every year he votes to keep the troops there by proving funding. The Dems control both houses, they have the power to bring the troops home by not allow the Neocon's the funding. Only Ralph Nader is for real change.
This man is unfit to be president... So we attack countries now and then occupy them for a century?
DON'T FALL FOR THE SWEET TALK!!!
TEN COMPELLING REASONS TO VOTE MCCAIN
1. CHECK ON LIBERAL CONGRESS. The only way the liberal Congress will be checked at all is if McCain gets elected. Otherwise Pelosi, Dodd, and Frank(the very same people who contributed greatly to the current crisis through resisting reforms to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and pushing "affordable housing" to those who weren't credit worthy) will have unchecked freedom to cause further economic havoc and impose irresponsible, unaffordable spending programs on this country(we've had a Democratic Congress for the last two years and frankly they've done a terrible job?-the last thing we need to do is to give them unchecked power)
2. OBAMA TAX POLICIES WILL TURN CRISIS INTO CATASTROPHE Obama, despite his promises, will turn a crisis into a catastrophe if his economic policies are implemented. This will not help the average "Joe". Raising taxes in a weak economy is the worst possible economic policy one can do. In 1932, for example,(in an effort eerily similar to the rationale Obama is using) Congress raised taxes on the wealthy and the result was an 8 point jump in unemployment. Moreover, taking money from the pool of funds job creators have means less money to pay wages, less money to pay health care and other benefits, and less jobs. What good is a $500.00 government check if the tax punishment meted out by Obama on your boss forces your boss to cut salaries, health care benefits, raise prices on consumers or, in the worst case scenario, close the business?
3. REAL OBAMA VIEWS MIDDLE CLASS AS "BITTER CLINGERS" AND OBAMA'S JOE THE PLUMBER ENCOUNTER SHOWS HIS TRUE DISDAIN FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS We've seen evidence of what Obama really thinks about the average "Joe" and it isn't encouraging or pretty. Remember Obama's remarks that Pennsylvanians were "bitter clingers to guns and religion". These remarks were made when Obama wasn't expecting them to be recopied(they thus represent the real Obama). And why should we be surprised at this elitist worldview given the fact Obama is a Ivy League lawyer who spent 20 years in the hate filled church of Jeremiah Wright? Further, look at Obama's appalling treatment of "Joe" the Plumber. "Joe" is an average guy who wants to buy a business but his dreams can not happen under the Obama tax plan because Obama takes away any incentive to gross more than $250,000.00 in income. And both Obama and Biden essentially mocked "Joe the Plumber" once they learned he was probably a McCain supporter. They and the media made sure(within a days time) that this average "Joe" would have numerous embarrassing details about his life exposed worldwide in an effort to discredit him. And why, all because(when Obama came to his house?he didn't seek out Obama?Obama sought him out) he dared to ask a reasonable straightforward question that any private citizen should be able to ask their President? Vote for other Democrats if you like(except Murtha who in my view shares the same elitist worldview as demonstrated by his comments Pennsylvanians are "racists" and "rednecks") but we don't need more elitists like Obama in leadership positions.
4. DEMOCRATIC PARTY LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CURRENT CRISIS. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, and Barney Frank, and ACORN have pushed for the "affordable housing" policies that have encouraged or pressured banks into making loans to poor minorities and whites who weren't credit worthy. These bad loans are at the root of the current crisis(not "deregulation" as Obama demogogically claims---there was little to no financial "deregulation" under Bush---in fact even more financial regulation in the form of Sarbanes Oxley---and Gramm Leach Bliley was under Clinton and may have helped the current crisis by making mergers between commercial and investment banks easier). Obama and Dodd were the top two recipients of Fannie Mae campaign contributions. Obama also picked Jim Johnson(former Fannie Mae executive) to lead his vice presidential team. According to the Washington Post, one of Obama's economic advisers is Franklin Raines(another Fannie Mae executive who in Raines' case raked in 90 million dollars from Fannie Mae). Obama represented ACORN, trained ACORN workers, he and Ayers gave $200,000 to ACORN, Obama's campaign gave $800,000.00 to ACORN, the Democrats included a grant for ACORN in the original bailout bill and ACORN intimidated many banks into giving bad loans to minorities with discrimination lawsuits. John McCain, in contrast, called for reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, and Dodd, resisted those reforms. Bush called for numerous reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Democrats also opposed these reforms. So why in the world, given the fact the Democrats largely caused this crisis, would we want to put Obama, Dodd, Reid, Pelosi, and Frank in total unchecked command of the country?
5. HEALTH CARE PLAN DISASTROUS On health care, Obama's plan is unaffordable and will lead to a total collapse of the system ultimately. Obama wants a single payer system(he doesn't say that now outwardly but that's what he wants?-in 2003 in a speech before the AFL-CIO he said he favored a single payer system?-further his plan will ultimately lead to single payer because private insurers will be crowded out of the market?-they will be subject to costly new mandates and won't be able to compete with Obama's government subsidized plan) And single payer is an abject disaster and the the worst possible choice for health care. Why? For one thing, if you have single payer, you never get rid of it and you have no other option if you don't like the way the single payer treats you. Further, in single payer countries like Canada, you have enormous wait lines(many Canadians flock to the US for care because of these wait lines), health care gets rationed(the government covers less because they have to in order to cut costs), and quality doctors leave the system(because they are paid low wages under single payer systems or less than they could make elsewhere). So Obama's health care plan will not only not help the average "Joe", his single payer dream will only lead to further hardship for the average "Joe" and a collapse of the system.
6. OBAMA ENERGY PLAN LEADS TO GREATER, NOT LESS DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL On energy, Obama's energy policies will do next to nothing to help this country achieve "energy indepedence". The last time a "windfall profits tax" was imposed(under Carter) our dependence on foreign oil grew and this happened because the windfall profits tax kills innovation on the part of oil companies(why should they drill more if they can't make any profits from more drilling because Obama will take the money away) Moreover, Obama and the Democrats have historically railed against more drilling(Obama even scoffed we could save more energy by inflating our tires than we could gain from drilling for more oil) and nuclear power(two energy sources which are critical to helping us lessen dependence on foreign oil) so McCain and Palin are much more reliable in terms of drilling for more oil and building more nuclear power plants. Biden also said he and Obama wouldn't build any "clean coal" plants. You should also note Obama wants to keep gas prices high(in fact he said he wasn't upset about the fact gas prices rose, only that they rose too fast). Keeping gas prices high certainly doesn't help the average "Joe". And Obama also favors keeping gas taxes high while McCain has favored suspending the gas tax in the summer. The gas tax clearly hurts the average "Joe" because everyone has to buy gas(regardless of income level) yet it is McCain, not Obama, who is willing to give the average "Joe" the tax relief.
7. OBAMA FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE There is also no reason to believe Obama will be more fiscally responsible than McCain. McCain has proposed a spending freeze while Obama propses a trillion dollars in new spending. The resulting debt burden created by these spending programs will place an incredible burden and yoke on future generations. McCain is much more likely to keep spending in check.
8. MCCAIN MORE EXPERIENCED. OBAMA'S FOREIGN POLICY DISASTROUS In terms of foreign affairs, McCain has 26 years experience, Obama has 2. And Biden's experience shows he has made the wrong judgment numerous times so he can't be counted on to offer much help to Obama(after 9/11 Biden proposed giving $200 million to Iran?-a ridiculous idea, Biden also proposed partitioning Iraq?an idea Iraqis almost unanimously rejected, Biden and Obama opposed the surge while McCain's judgment was vindicated on the surge). In terms of an unsteady hand, Obama has certainly shown an unsteady hand with his foreign policy gaffes already(e.g. wrong on the surge, 3 different answers on the Georgia situation, talking with dictators "without preconditions", invading Pakistan). And, more recently, Biden said Obama would experience an international crisis if elected because he's so inexperienced and that "America hang with us because our response won't seem to be the right one". There's no evidence therefore Obama is capable of handling foreign policy crises better than McCain.
9. PALIN MOST EXPERIENCED ON ENERGY ISSUES, PALIN AT LEAST AS EXPERIENCED AS OBAMA In terms of Palin, Palin has at least as much experience than Obama. And on the critical energy issues, it is Palin who arguably has the most experience and knowledge of ALL the candidates on energy issues(because Palin was an oil and gas regulator, her husband has worked in the oil business, Palin negotiated the natural gas pipeline deal in Alaska, and Palin has lectured and given speeches on energy issues). Palin also hasn't been given a fair shake by the media so if you're relying on CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, or the New York Times for your information on Palin, you are not, in my view, getting a fair picture of her. You should know that in the ABC interview Palin had, portions of it were edited out and were not shown to the public(these edited out portions would have made her answers appear more complete).
10. OBAMA'S ALLIANCES RAISE CRITICAL DOUBTS ABOUT HIS JUDGMENT AND SHOW HE LIKELY HAS RADICAL POLITICAL LEANINGS. And I haven't even discussed Obama's numerous alliances with radicals, party hacks or corrupt individuals such as
a) Reverend Wright
b) Bill Ayers/ACORN
c) Tony Rezko
d) Rashid Khalidi
e) Khalid al Monsour
f) Stroger
g) Richard Daley
h) Father Pfleger
Ten compelling reasons to vote McCain over Obama.
Rick Moran explains that B. Hussein Obama secured the support of the Daley Machine for his presidential run by making a deal, and that Machine tactics, deals, and political corruption are really the standard operating procedure for the supposed "candidate of Change."
http://neveryetmelted.com/index.php/category/richard-daley/
1. His very first race for state senate, he used the time honored Machine tactic of challenging the nominating petitions of every other candidate, getting all 4 of them removed from the ballot.
2. He cultivated a relationship with the ancient President of the Illinois State Senate Emil Jones who told a colleague in 2002 after the Democrats swept into office "I'm gonna make me a senator." Jones then proceeded to give Obama credit on the passage of 26 key legislative measures ? almost all of which had been pushed by other state senators for years ? thus giving Obama a record of sorts to go with all that charisma. Obama calls Jones his "political godfather."
3. While in the Senate, Obama has had numerous opportunities to live up to his promised "post partisan" reforms and has never ? repeat never ? participated in any bi-partisan agreement reached by Democrats and Republicans on any issue. He has gone so far as to reject the outcomes of those compromises on immigration reform and an agreement on confirming federal judges.
4. When faced with a choice between supporting a mayoral candidate who stood for clean government and the corruption of the Chicago Machine, Obama chose old fashioned power politics.
Obama's political career is replete with examples of opportunism, cynical deal making, hack politics, and business as usual relationships with crooks and scam artists like Tony Rezko. His entire presidential campaign is built on a lie; that he is a different kind of politician and will be able to change the way business is done in Washington.
When given the opportunity in the past, Obama has usually chosen doing things the old fashioned way. Why in God's name should we believe him now? Did he try and "reform" Chicago politics? Did he try and "reform" the Senate while his colleagues worked on bi-partisan agreements on vital issues?
You can support the man's policies without holding him up (and throwing in our faces) the idea he is some kind of "new" politician who will change everyone's lives. And if he keeps pushing that meme, he will look like the emperor with no clothes as facts about his relationships with various shady Chicago characters come to light, giving the lie to his grandiose claims like "We are the change that we are seeking."
By JDZ
Comment This! | Permalink
Work with the Iraqi government on a "status of forces" agreement on the numbers, roles, locations etc for UN and US troops. There should be a date set to reach this agreement. If the date is not met, the remaining US troops and equipment who are not part of the UN effort should be completely withdrawn in a carefully prepared method that minimizes our risk.
ı hope so too
Obama has had numerous opportunities to live up to his promised "post partisan" reforms and has never ? repeat never ? participated in any bi-partisan agreement reached by Democrats and Republicans on any issue.
Congratulations to a New President of The United States.
Barack Obama.
We are Indonesian Webbies very happy to see and hear for Barack Obama for the new president. Its not because he was got the basic school on indonesia. But its all because NEW MINDED OF US of A :)
Regards.
agree with entigech :D.
And hope Obama will have new strategy and make peace
For more who knows, maybe the movie will inspire a whole new breed of border jumpers if the country goes red again...
Barack Obama as president USA , we are proud of him
Go busby ... upss go Obamma. Yes We Can :D
congrats to obama...i am big fans of obama,he can make change
yes we can obama,iknow you can change the world
I hope obama can make change with this economical crissis!
Someone needed to ask either McCain or the old Jew how the people of, say Italy feel about us building the huge Air force Base in their country.
Hope he will stop the war in Irak soon. Congrat once again
let the newly elected president deal with the subject, if people agreed, they should be done
Followers SUCK
thankyou for the info
Keith ? http://brokenwholeblog.blogspot.com/search?q=p1&max-results=20
All the solutions talked about for Iraq, both from candidates I like (such as Obama or Clinton) and those I wouldn't trust (with a barge pole) to handle foreign policy (such as John "Hundred Years" McCain) just seem completely unrealistic. Moreover, at least on the Democratic side, they surely know it. They're playing sound-bite politics. They seem to think that most Democrats just want to hear the simple plan "get out of Iraq" rather than hear a more nuanced and realistic strategy.
It's the kind of thing I hate about politics. Obama is a candidate who I love, who I'm sure realizes just as much as I do that his position on getting out of Iraq is unrealistic, but yet who continues to keep it on his platform, presumably out of fear of losing the sound-bite war.
Yet I'm convinced that most Democrats and independent voters are educated enough, and have enough awareness to tolerate the more nuanced strategy. In fact I think that if Obama's team worked out now a well-reasoned plan for extracting ourselves from Iraq in a way that will minimize harm to our armed forces while giving Iraq the maximum chance of resolving their problems, it would be a net gain for their campaign. And it would certainly work well going up against McCain's Hundred Year War.
They'd have to work closely with the defense department to come up with a plan. My own idea for such a plan (obvious, worked out without the cooperation of the Pentagon!) would be something along these lines:
1) Set clear and absolute deadlines. E.g. thirty thousand troops will be rotated out of Iraq over this given period of weeks; etc.
2) Bring in the UN. This will require a lot of work, but it has to be done. Fixing Iraq is not a part-time job. A coalition has to be built similar to the impressive one put together by GWB's father (a man I admire) for Kuwait. This would be both a peace-keeping force, as well as an infrastructure support team.
3) Devise a plan for relocating, with the help of international organizations, the tens of thousands of Iraqis who worked with the coalition. We have a moral obligation to not leave them stranded.
4) Work with the Iraqi government on a "status of forces" agreement on the numbers, roles, locations etc for UN and US troops. There should be a date set to reach this agreement. If the date is not met, the remaining US troops and equipment who are not part of the UN effort should be completely withdrawn in a carefully prepared method that minimizes our risk.
Obviously this approach cannot be easily sound-bitten. But I think this type of plan, or something like it -- any plan that was carefully and deliberately thought out -- would be terrific material during a debate, and would get a lot of pundit/editorial/blogosphere support.
But I'm not holding my breath. This is why I both love and hate politics. I'm fascinated by it; yet politicians - even those I love and admire like Obama - do dumb things because it's the way things have always been done. When Obama talks about change, and then you think about the type of thing I'm talking about here, you see that there's a whole lot more changing we need to consider than has ever been seriously discussed.
DON'T FALL FOR THE SWEET TALK!!!
TEN COMPELLING REASONS TO VOTE MCCAIN
1. CHECK ON LIBERAL CONGRESS. The only way the liberal Congress will be checked at all is if McCain gets elected. Otherwise Pelosi, Dodd, and Frank(the very same people who contributed greatly to the current crisis through resisting reforms to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and pushing "affordable housing" to those who weren't credit worthy) will have unchecked freedom to cause further economic havoc and impose irresponsible, unaffordable spending programs on this country(we've had a Democratic Congress for the last two years and frankly they've done a terrible job?-the last thing we need to do is to give them unchecked power)
2. OBAMA TAX POLICIES WILL TURN CRISIS INTO CATASTROPHE Obama, despite his promises, will turn a crisis into a catastrophe if his economic policies are implemented. This will not help the average "Joe". Raising taxes in a weak economy is the worst possible economic policy one can do. In 1932, for example,(in an effort eerily similar to the rationale Obama is using) Congress raised taxes on the wealthy and the result was an 8 point jump in unemployment. Moreover, taking money from the pool of funds job creators have means less money to pay wages, less money to pay health care and other benefits, and less jobs. What good is a $500.00 government check if the tax punishment meted out by Obama on your boss forces your boss to cut salaries, health care benefits, raise prices on consumers or, in the worst case scenario, close the business?
3. REAL OBAMA VIEWS MIDDLE CLASS AS "BITTER CLINGERS" AND OBAMA'S JOE THE PLUMBER ENCOUNTER SHOWS HIS TRUE DISDAIN FOR THE MIDDLE CLASS We've seen evidence of what Obama really thinks about the average "Joe" and it isn't encouraging or pretty. Remember Obama's remarks that Pennsylvanians were "bitter clingers to guns and religion". These remarks were made when Obama wasn't expecting them to be recopied(they thus represent the real Obama). And why should we be surprised at this elitist worldview given the fact Obama is a Ivy League lawyer who spent 20 years in the hate filled church of Jeremiah Wright? Further, look at Obama's appalling treatment of "Joe" the Plumber. "Joe" is an average guy who wants to buy a business but his dreams can not happen under the Obama tax plan because Obama takes away any incentive to gross more than $250,000.00 in income. And both Obama and Biden essentially mocked "Joe the Plumber" once they learned he was probably a McCain supporter. They and the media made sure(within a days time) that this average "Joe" would have numerous embarrassing details about his life exposed worldwide in an effort to discredit him. And why, all because(when Obama came to his house?he didn't seek out Obama?Obama sought him out) he dared to ask a reasonable straightforward question that any private citizen should be able to ask their President? Vote for other Democrats if you like(except Murtha who in my view shares the same elitist worldview as demonstrated by his comments Pennsylvanians are "racists" and "rednecks") but we don't need more elitists like Obama in leadership positions.
4. DEMOCRATIC PARTY LARGELY RESPONSIBLE FOR CURRENT CRISIS. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Dodd, and Barney Frank, and ACORN have pushed for the "affordable housing" policies that have encouraged or pressured banks into making loans to poor minorities and whites who weren't credit worthy. These bad loans are at the root of the current crisis(not "deregulation" as Obama demogogically claims---there was little to no financial "deregulation" under Bush---in fact even more financial regulation in the form of Sarbanes Oxley---and Gramm Leach Bliley was under Clinton and may have helped the current crisis by making mergers between commercial and investment banks easier). Obama and Dodd were the top two recipients of Fannie Mae campaign contributions. Obama also picked Jim Johnson(former Fannie Mae executive) to lead his vice presidential team. According to the Washington Post, one of Obama's economic advisers is Franklin Raines(another Fannie Mae executive who in Raines' case raked in 90 million dollars from Fannie Mae). Obama represented ACORN, trained ACORN workers, he and Ayers gave $200,000 to ACORN, Obama's campaign gave $800,000.00 to ACORN, the Democrats included a grant for ACORN in the original bailout bill and ACORN intimidated many banks into giving bad loans to minorities with discrimination lawsuits. John McCain, in contrast, called for reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, while Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Frank, and Dodd, resisted those reforms. Bush called for numerous reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and the Democrats also opposed these reforms. So why in the world, given the fact the Democrats largely caused this crisis, would we want to put Obama, Dodd, Reid, Pelosi, and Frank in total unchecked command of the country?
5. HEALTH CARE PLAN DISASTROUS On health care, Obama's plan is unaffordable and will lead to a total collapse of the system ultimately. Obama wants a single payer system(he doesn't say that now outwardly but that's what he wants?-in 2003 in a speech before the AFL-CIO he said he favored a single payer system?-further his plan will ultimately lead to single payer because private insurers will be crowded out of the market?-they will be subject to costly new mandates and won't be able to compete with Obama's government subsidized plan) And single payer is an abject disaster and the the worst possible choice for health care. Why? For one thing, if you have single payer, you never get rid of it and you have no other option if you don't like the way the single payer treats you. Further, in single payer countries like Canada, you have enormous wait lines(many Canadians flock to the US for care because of these wait lines), health care gets rationed(the government covers less because they have to in order to cut costs), and quality doctors leave the system(because they are paid low wages under single payer systems or less than they could make elsewhere). So Obama's health care plan will not only not help the average "Joe", his single payer dream will only lead to further hardship for the average "Joe" and a collapse of the system.
6. OBAMA ENERGY PLAN LEADS TO GREATER, NOT LESS DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL On energy, Obama's energy policies will do next to nothing to help this country achieve "energy indepedence". The last time a "windfall profits tax" was imposed(under Carter) our dependence on foreign oil grew and this happened because the windfall profits tax kills innovation on the part of oil companies(why should they drill more if they can't make any profits from more drilling because Obama will take the money away) Moreover, Obama and the Democrats have historically railed against more drilling(Obama even scoffed we could save more energy by inflating our tires than we could gain from drilling for more oil) and nuclear power(two energy sources which are critical to helping us lessen dependence on foreign oil) so McCain and Palin are much more reliable in terms of drilling for more oil and building more nuclear power plants. Biden also said he and Obama wouldn't build any "clean coal" plants. You should also note Obama wants to keep gas prices high(in fact he said he wasn't upset about the fact gas prices rose, only that they rose too fast). Keeping gas prices high certainly doesn't help the average "Joe". And Obama also favors keeping gas taxes high while McCain has favored suspending the gas tax in the summer. The gas tax clearly hurts the average "Joe" because everyone has to buy gas(regardless of income level) yet it is McCain, not Obama, who is willing to give the average "Joe" the tax relief.
7. OBAMA FISCALLY IRRESPONSIBLE There is also no reason to believe Obama will be more fiscally responsible than McCain. McCain has proposed a spending freeze while Obama propses a trillion dollars in new spending. The resulting debt burden created by these spending programs will place an incredible burden and yoke on future generations. McCain is much more likely to keep spending in check.
8. MCCAIN MORE EXPERIENCED. OBAMA'S FOREIGN POLICY DISASTROUS In terms of foreign affairs, McCain has 26 years experience, Obama has 2. And Biden's experience shows he has made the wrong judgment numerous times so he can't be counted on to offer much help to Obama(after 9/11 Biden proposed giving $200 million to Iran?-a ridiculous idea, Biden also proposed partitioning Iraq?an idea Iraqis almost unanimously rejected, Biden and Obama opposed the surge while McCain's judgment was vindicated on the surge). In terms of an unsteady hand, Obama has certainly shown an unsteady hand with his foreign policy gaffes already(e.g. wrong on the surge, 3 different answers on the Georgia situation, talking with dictators "without preconditions", invading Pakistan). And, more recently, Biden said Obama would experience an international crisis if elected because he's so inexperienced and that "America hang with us because our response won't seem to be the right one". There's no evidence therefore Obama is capable of handling foreign policy crises better than McCain.
9. PALIN MOST EXPERIENCED ON ENERGY ISSUES, PALIN AT LEAST AS EXPERIENCED AS OBAMA In terms of Palin, Palin has at least as much experience than Obama. And on the critical energy issues, it is Palin who arguably has the most experience and knowledge of ALL the candidates on energy issues(because Palin was an oil and gas regulator, her husband has worked in the oil business, Palin negotiated the natural gas pipeline deal in Alaska, and Palin has lectured and given speeches on energy issues). Palin also hasn't been given a fair shake by the media so if you're relying on CNN, ABC, CBS, MSNBC, or the New York Times for your information on Palin, you are not, in my view, getting a fair picture of her. You should know that in the ABC interview Palin had, portions of it were edited out and were not shown to the public(these edited out portions would have made her answers appear more complete).
10. OBAMA'S ALLIANCES RAISE CRITICAL DOUBTS ABOUT HIS JUDGMENT AND SHOW HE LIKELY HAS RADICAL POLITICAL LEANINGS. And I haven't even discussed Obama's numerous alliances with radicals, party hacks or corrupt individuals such as
a) Reverend Wright
b) Bill Ayers/ACORN
c) Tony Rezko
d) Rashid Khalidi
e) Khalid al Monsour
f) Stroger
g) Richard Daley
h) Father Pfleger
Ten compelling reasons to vote McCain over Obama.
Rick Moran explains that B. Hussein Obama secured the support of the Daley Machine for his presidential run by making a deal, and that Machine tactics, deals, and political corruption are really the standard operating procedure for the supposed "candidate of Change."
http://neveryetmelted.com/index.php/category/richard-daley/
1. His very first race for state senate, he used the time honored Machine tactic of challenging the nominating petitions of every other candidate, getting all 4 of them removed from the ballot.
2. He cultivated a relationship with the ancient President of the Illinois State Senate Emil Jones who told a colleague in 2002 after the Democrats swept into office "I'm gonna make me a senator." Jones then proceeded to give Obama credit on the passage of 26 key legislative measures ? almost all of which had been pushed by other state senators for years ? thus giving Obama a record of sorts to go with all that charisma. Obama calls Jones his "political godfather."
3. While in the Senate, Obama has had numerous opportunities to live up to his promised "post partisan" reforms and has never ? repeat never ? participated in any bi-partisan agreement reached by Democrats and Republicans on any issue. He has gone so far as to reject the outcomes of those compromises on immigration reform and an agreement on confirming federal judges.
4. When faced with a choice between supporting a mayoral candidate who stood for clean government and the corruption of the Chicago Machine, Obama chose old fashioned power politics.
Obama's political career is replete with examples of opportunism, cynical deal making, hack politics, and business as usual relationships with crooks and scam artists like Tony Rezko. His entire presidential campaign is built on a lie; that he is a different kind of politician and will be able to change the way business is done in Washington.
When given the opportunity in the past, Obama has usually chosen doing things the old fashioned way. Why in God's name should we believe him now? Did he try and "reform" Chicago politics? Did he try and "reform" the Senate while his colleagues worked on bi-partisan agreements on vital issues?
You can support the man's policies without holding him up (and throwing in our faces) the idea he is some kind of "new" politician who will change everyone's lives. And if he keeps pushing that meme, he will look like the emperor with no clothes as facts about his relationships with various shady Chicago characters come to light, giving the lie to his grandiose claims like "We are the change that we are seeking."
By JDZ
Comment This! | Permalink
Keith ? http://brokenwholeblog.blogspot.com/search?q=p1&max-results=20
All the solutions talked about for Iraq, both from candidates I like (such as Obama or Clinton) and those I wouldn't trust (with a barge pole) to handle foreign policy (such as John "Hundred Years" McCain) just seem completely unrealistic. Moreover, at least on the Democratic side, they surely know it. They're playing sound-bite politics. They seem to think that most Democrats just want to hear the simple plan "get out of Iraq" rather than hear a more nuanced and realistic strategy.
It's the kind of thing I hate about politics. Obama is a candidate who I love, who I'm sure realizes just as much as I do that his position on getting out of Iraq is unrealistic, but yet who continues to keep it on his platform, presumably out of fear of losing the sound-bite war.
Yet I'm convinced that most Democrats and independent voters are educated enough, and have enough awareness to tolerate the more nuanced strategy. In fact I think that if Obama's team worked out now a well-reasoned plan for extracting ourselves from Iraq in a way that will minimize harm to our armed forces while giving Iraq the maximum chance of resolving their problems, it would be a net gain for their campaign. And it would certainly work well going up against McCain's Hundred Year War.
They'd have to work closely with the defense department to come up with a plan. My own idea for such a plan (obvious, worked out without the cooperation of the Pentagon!) would be something along these lines:
1) Set clear and absolute deadlines. E.g. thirty thousand troops will be rotated out of Iraq over this given period of weeks; etc.
2) Bring in the UN. This will require a lot of work, but it has to be done. Fixing Iraq is not a part-time job. A coalition has to be built similar to the impressive one put together by GWB's father (a man I admire) for Kuwait. This would be both a peace-keeping force, as well as an infrastructure support team.
3) Devise a plan for relocating, with the help of international organizations, the tens of thousands of Iraqis who worked with the coalition. We have a moral obligation to not leave them stranded.
4) Work with the Iraqi government on a "status of forces" agreement on the numbers, roles, locations etc for UN and US troops. There should be a date set to reach this agreement. If the date is not met, the remaining US troops and equipment who are not part of the UN effort should be completely withdrawn in a carefully prepared method that minimizes our risk.
Obviously this approach cannot be easily sound-bitten. But I think this type of plan, or something like it -- any plan that was carefully and deliberately thought out -- would be terrific material during a debate, and would get a lot of pundit/editorial/blogosphere support.
But I'm not holding my breath. This is why I both love and hate politics. I'm fascinated by it; yet politicians - even those I love and admire like Obama - do dumb things because it's the way things have always been done. When Obama talks about change, and then you think about the type of thing I'm talking about here, you see that there's a whole lot more changing we need to consider than has ever been seriously discussed.
USA goes red again?
Man, you are going crazy. USA never goes to red color. NEVER! Why? Becouse red flag is going down with Soviet Union in 91's. And USA is 100% democratical society.
Very great explanation. I
Very great explanation. I really reading this article about McCain.. Thank you for posting.
Well said...
Good points... Liberty11, sometimes I wonder we've got bigger problems to worry about like healthcare, immigration law and taxes... some poor folks cann't afford basic chemotherapy medications and left to struggle on their own... i just hope whoever it is makes everyone's life easier..
yup!
your right @liberty11
Hey, pretty nice getting a sound bite gift from the experts.
Is there such a thing as a "Silver Headed Ho"?
Yep, he's back ... the Schmuck Talk Express(TM).
McCain is a PNAC Republican.
Aint they all? Now,Its Empire
for everybody except Edwards. But if we leave Iraq and leave Iran alone, what then--
return to business-as-usual?
Nobody has figured in Israel.
And every president obeys the Zionist State.
mccain will never be president, what he says really doesn't matter. thus, what he says really doesn't matter
Carbon capture politics
100yrs? that's pretty overoptimistic if you ask me... are we going to be still alive until then? all kinds of disease propping up, antibiotic resistant microbes, germs, drug resistant cancer that is sometimes hard to treat with chemotherapy you name it... and i don't want to go to water related issues...
Attention Senator McCain - the US troops in Korea, Japan and Europe are not in the middle of a shooting war - a civil war for that matter. Maybe if Senator Lieberman's daughters would join the military, I would take his macho BS about Iraq and Iran seriously and not the rantings of a shill for the Israeli lobby
McCain got Jewish money, so he supports the wars for Zionism. AIPAC rules.
I agree with the old war criminal, partially. I think it would be good to leave US troops in Iraq as long as they are being killed. As soon as they come home to Amerika, those mindless mercenaries will continue to wreak a lot more havoc stateside for the remainder of their desperate, pathetic lives.
Thanks everyone...I'm sure the Mother Jones staff was worried they were losing their anti-Semitic readers. Glad to see you're alive and well and full of prejudiced hatred.
You are right Rose. There are too many anti-Semites. The ADL says that the Mexican Catholics score very high in this area. Build the fence. The illegals have to go. We don't need to import more anti-Semites.
Let's not forget, if you say anything bad about Israel, you must be antisemitic. It would have nothing to do with the nation's apartheid policies.
Progressives need to talk more about imperialism, and the evils thereof. Otherwise McCain's and other's permanent presence strategy will continue to make sense to a sizable portion of the electorate. Why are all the Democratic contenders afraid of the "I" word?
thank you john for taking yourself out of the race! that coupled with have the world's most selfserving politician as your 'running mate' - lieberman- assure your early withdrawal....
I hope and pray that people don't agree with McCain. And, I hope and pray that Obama is sincere when he says he will bring the troops home within 8 months of taking office.
I sure hope so. It would be
I sure hope so. It would be nice for the public to know that there are great efforts to help the Iraq gov. be independent and slowly start pulling our kids out. I wouldn't want the job they've done to this point be done in vain. I would think that Mr. President Obama would have that as apart of his approach.
Senator McCain supports racism because Israel promotes NOT a vision of a inclusive "multi-cultural," "multi-ethnic" society (like we do in America) for Israel, but instead a racist exclusionary "Jewish state." It is racist because a Jew is defined as coming from a Jewish mother(genes). That state is openly dedicated to the advancement of the Jewish religion, culture, and even the genetic preservation of the Jewish people. Israel uses racial profiling. Israel values Judaism above other religions. Israel should seek to be welcoming and inclusive and respect all religions, or even those with no religion.
Israeli ethnocentric, chauvinism and xenophobic values are just too extreme. Israel does not share American values and let us therefore not share American taxpayer money with them. Israel needs to advance to the 21st century in its values. The days of racism should be a thing of the past. Israeli society is where America's society was 100 years ago. Israel can do better. Let us have that as our goal to advance Israel to the 21st century in the field of civil rights.
I wonder if McCains children or grandchildren will be in Iraq for 100 years???
George W. McCain Alzheimer.
Wow. This man is unfit to be president... So we attack countries now and then occupy them for a century? Insane
YES THERE IS HIS NAME IS Lieberman HE MUST BE BUCKING FOR THE VP SPOT FOR MCCAIN WHICH IS FINE WTH ME THAT WAY ME CAUSE THE HE WOULD NO LONGER BE MY STATES SENATOR A JOB HE SHOULD NOT BEEN REELECTED FOR