In The Blogs
- ‹ previous
- 2695 of 7916
- next ›
McCain Tries to Backtrack on 100 Years of War
John McCain has finally gone to the press and backtracked on his quote that he would comfortable with a 100-year-long American presence in Iraq, saying that he "was taken out context -- wildly."
Uh, actually no. Our very own David Corn was at the event where McCain made the 100 years comment, and asked the candidate about it afterward. Check the link. McCain can't weasel out of this one.
Digg
Reddit
Twitter
Facebook
Buzz Up!
StumbleUpon
MySpace
LinkedIn
Delicious
Furl
Google
Yahoo
The NYT states that McCain had a relationship with a lobbyist Vicki Iseman, 30 years younger than him. "Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself ? instructing staff members to block the woman's access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity." Why did the NYT sit on this story until McCain had the nomination all locked up? Questions, Questions.
The NYT states that McCain had a relationship with a lobbyist Vicki Iseman, 30 years younger than him. "Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself ? instructing staff members to block the woman's access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity." Why did the NYT sit on this story until McCain had the nomination all locked up? Questions, Questions.
Too funny!
Next he will claim the "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran" was some photoshop paste-up by some crazy youtubers.
And yet some people will vote for him because . . . well I don't know why.
Glenn Kessler must be a tool, why didn't he follow up? I guess any candidate can just say "taken out of context" to deny anything on record and the "reporters" just move on?
UGH the M$M stinks.
The political maxim is that if you repeat a lie often enough and loudly enough, it will be taken for the truth.
The last person I would support for President is John McCain, but we do have a presence in many countries and to do so in Iraq would not be unusual once the war winds down. Don't be so critical just to make McCain's words conform to your dissatisfaction.
Am I missing something here?
Firstly, I'm not a McCain supporter, or even a conservative, but if the charge against him is indeed that he's willing to commit American soldiers to fight in Iraq for a hundred years (with the implication that he'll sacrafice as many American lives as it takes) then he was not backtracking in the slightest.
He stated in Janurary (as David Corn's post re-iterates) that it was not the length of time but the casualties that matter, and that so long as casualties are non-existent he is happy to maintain in Iraq -with the Bagdhad government's consent- a benign military presence, for as long as it takes. He isn't reffering to continuing the Iraq war for a century, he's simply talking about having troops stationed in a manner similar to the American presence in Germany or South Korea after WWII.
To quote the WP article: "The surge is succeeding," he said today. "We can bring our troops home with honor. And we can bring them all home or we can have security arrangements much along the lines we have had with other countries."
To take this and turn it into 'McCain's Hundred Year War' is to misconstrue what he said in Janurary.
With this in mind, I'd be more concerned as to how long McCain is willing to leave US troops in Iraq if things carry on the way they are at the moment.
All McCain has to say is that he did not mean say he would bomb Iran and the fools in this country will vote him in. The U.S.A is full of sick people who love war and killing. And if the Veterans vote McCain into the white house, I will never support our military again.
The NYT states that McCain had a relationship with a lobbyist Vicki Iseman, 30 years younger than him. "Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself instructing staff members to block the woman's access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity." Why did the NYT sit on this story until McCain had the nomination all locked up? Questions, Questions.