The official John McCain flip flop list is now up to 64. It’s a good thing someone is keeping track because the media certainly doesn’t cover it. This is why I want to make the case for a McCain-Romney ticket. The greatest flip flopping team in history.
Okay, who’s the most qualified to lead the country on national security issues? Let’s think about this for a second…
McCain wanted to attack Iraq preemptively in 1998, he voted to attack Iraq in 2003 and he now advocates staying there for as long as it takes. Not sure what that means, but maybe 100 years? Now, in 1998 keep in mind the fact that bin Laden issued his first fatwa against the west, which declared that killing North Americans was the “duty of every Muslim.” Following the fatwa, still in 1998 now, was the U.S. embassy bombings orchestrated by bin Laden’s network. So, in 1998 John McCain was fixated on Iraq while bin Laden was killing Americans and after 2001 when bin Laden killed more Americans and openly taunted the U.S. afterwards, John McCain authorized the invasion of Iraq. Amazingly, bin Laden and his network still exist today 7 years after the WTC attacks, yet McCain stays fixated on Iraq. Anyone want to talk judgment and experience now?
Yesterday, Barack Obama reaffirmed his views on Iraq, highlighting the fact that this misguided war is not the central front of the war on terror - Afghanistan/Pakistan is. But John McCain disagrees, Iraq is the central front he says, because bin Laden says so. Awesome, so now U.S. foreign policy is directed by Osama bin Laden? Ironically, McCain is the guy who says he will follow bin Laden to the “gates of hell” every chance he gets on the campaign stump. Is bin Laden in Iraq, though? Isn’t the guy who attacked us and his entire network still in the Afghanistan region near Pakistan?
So, tell me who has the better judgment when it comes to the priorities of our foreign policy? Obama has the same view as the current Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mullen, our nations highest military officer, when it comes to sending more troops to Afghanistan. The Taliban is moving back in, so what’s McCain’s plan for Afghanistan and Pakistan? I still haven’t heard what he wants to do there because he’s made Iraq the central front of his campaign. It’s tragic and it’s offensive. When Obama declared in a Democratic presidential debate that he would launch an attack inside Pakistan if they would not act upon intelligence of Al Qaeda’s whereabouts, McCain called Obama naive. Fascinating.
In my judgment, McCain is bin Laden’s candidate in this election because he serves bin Laden’s interests. He flexes his muscles when he says he’ll follow bin Laden to the “gates of hell” but ultimately he helps bin Laden in many ways and even McCain himself has admitted in the past, ironically, that bin Laden helps the Republican Party. It’s a mutually beneficial relationship, I guess, since McCain helps bin Laden sell Iraq as the central front in the war on terror, which only distracts the U.S. from capturing him and fuels recruitment efforts by legitimizing bin Laden’s propaganda efforts, and on the flip side bin Laden supposedly helps Republicans win elections.
It’s time for a change in judgment.
McCain maybe forgetting things again? Here he is commenting on Obama’s reaction to the Supreme Court’s decision to ban the death penalty in the case of child rape.
“My opponent may not care for this particular decision, but it was exactly the kind of opinion we could expect from an Obama court,” the Arizona senator said.
I guess McCain forgot that he actually voted to confirm four out of the five justices who formed the majority opinion in this case. That would be Justice Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy and Souter.
And maybe McCain, who is seen here taking credit for the new GI Bill, forgot that he actually campaigned against it. Straight-talk baby!
Here, Joe Lieberman incites fear by insinuating that America will be attacked in 2009 because terrorists like to test new presidents. Huh? His distasteful suggestion that Americans need to elect someone who is battle ready because terrorists will “test” the new president was obviously a fear tactic designed to scare voters into voting for McCain. Still, I go back to a simple point that goes unanswered, why do these tough guy freedom fighter Republicans think they have an advantage by playing the terrorism card? The people who attacked us are in Afghanistan/Pakistan growing their movement, yet Republicans advocate staying in Iraq forever. It’s an interesting strategy, isn’t it?
So here we have John McCain and Lieberman saying, “the U.S. is safer from terrorism today than before 9/11,” yet now they are telling us we’ll be attacked again and soon, so because we’re tougher on terrorism you need to stick with us to be safe. Huh? Okay, so we are safer from terrorism today because Republicans are tougher on terror, but we’ll be attacked again soon, so you need to vote Republican because we need to stay in Iraq where the terrorist group who attacked us does not exist. Got it? Okay, good.
Can’t wait to see how this goes over with the Rush Limbaugh wing of the Republican Party.
McCain told the Latino officials the proposal failed because Americans were not confident Congress would protect U.S. borders before dealing with the question of illegal immigration.
“GOD’S CHILDREN”
“I want to assure you we will address this issue in a humane and compassionate fashion,” he said, calling illegal immigrants “God’s children.”
If I were Obama I would make stem cell research, illegal immigration and the marriage amendment the platform of my campaign. McCain shares the same position as his liberal counterpart on all of these hot button issues. That’s certainly not going to inspire the base of the Republican Party in November.