But, since you asked, here is a NEW interview (with a foreign paper) with “our” guy, denouncing OUR President of the United States as not credible, a torturer, a human rights abuser, a polluter of the earth, and damaging to the world.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,534459,00.html
SPIEGEL: Senator McCain, Europe is reserving a lot of hope for the next president of the United States. Will you try to win back trust in America around the world?
McCain: I know most of the leaders in Europe and other parts of the world and I have a long record of my positions and my ability to work together with our allies. I think I will start out with a level of credibility.
FROM THE MAGAZINE
Find out how you can reprint this DER SPIEGEL article in your publication. SPIEGEL: America has lost a lot of friends because President George W. Bush angered, indeed outraged, them. He allowed human rights to be violated at Guantanamo Bay, and he dismissed the joint effort to combat global warming. Under a President McCain, could we expect a change of course?
McCain: Yes. I would announce that we are not ever going to torture anyone held in American custody. I would announce that we were closing Guantanamo Bay and moving those prisoners to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and I would announce a commitment to addressing climate change and my dedication to a global agreement — but it has to include India and China.
SPIEGEL: So is America coming back to renegotiate the Kyoto Protocol?
McCain: I believe America is going to enter into negotiations to try to reach a global agreement. But, as I said, that agreement must include India and China, two of the emerging economies of the world. We would be foolish not to do so.
SPIEGEL: Will America attempt to go it alone less frequently in the future?
McCAIN: Well, we all hope that America will be multilateral again in the future. There were times when the United States acted unilaterally, but I think we would all prefer to work in concert with our friends and allies.
SPIEGEL: What role will the United Nations play? Bush always ignored the UN.
McCain: The United Nations always plays an important role. But right now we are having to deal with a Russia that is clearly intent on blocking action. That’s why the UN must act in a league of democracies that share our values and our common principles.
More...
AND, this is just a little bit of what he has been doing for years:
WASHINGTON - Sen. John McCain yesterday unleashed an attack on his own party, saying the GOP is ``astray’’ on key issues and criticizing President Bush [related, bio] on the war in Iraq.
*****``I believe my party has gone astray,’’ McCain said, criticizing GOP stands on environmental and minority issues.
*****``I think the Democratic Party is a fine party, and I have no problems with it, in their views and their philosophy,’’ he said. ``But I also feel the Republican Party can be brought back to the principles I articulated before.’’
*****The maverick senator made the remarks at a legislative seminar hosted by U.S. Rep. Martin T. Meehan (D-Lowell) as he again ruled out running on a ticket with Democrat John F. Kerry [related, bio].
*****The Arizona Republican took on President Bush for failing to prepare Americans for a long involvement in Iraq, saying, ``You can’t fly in on an aircraft carrier and declare victory and have the deaths continue. You can’t do that.’’
*****McCain said the U.S. should seek more U.N. involvement in Iraq. ``Many people in this room question, legitimately, whether we should have gone in or not,’’ he said, adding that that debate ``will be part of this presidential campaign.’”
(and he was mavericking on David Letterman last year, claiming GWB “wasted” the lives of our troops.
BTW, Gen Petraeus would laugh at your assertion that Bush and Rummy did not want a better plan to counter the insurgency, since he testified that the Pres and the DOD asked him to return and write the handbook on what had worked for him in his sector assignment, and then to return to Iraq and implement it. He was being called “King David” by the Iraqis in his orgininal post. All the Generals have testified to their thinking about big troop footprints, giving Iraqis responsibilities, training them, filtering out the bad guys. They Generals before Petraeus testified to all the tactics that worked and did not work.
McCain was agitating against the President (with the Dims) IN PUBLIC from the beginning, which aided and abetted, helping to prolong enemy belief that they could win. And obviously has some (you) believing that the President and Rumsfeld were just peachy with our men dying, while twiddling their thumbs. No statesman would do that.
No, obviously it is not me or some talk show hosts that spread lies about our President, and our mission. It is none of my business who you vote for, just do not pretend that McCain is some great guy, worthy of respect.
Having read what you said, and what McCain is quoted as saying ... One need not agree with McCain's comments to say that an intellectually honest person wouldn't characterize them as you did.
Oh please, cut the drama it does not work with me.
You are given evidence that McCain was championing the surge with news releases over a year old and you are fixated on the fact that McCain criticized one of your beloved talk show hosts and disagreed on how Bush and Rumsfeld were handling the war.
Again you show the foolishness of believing that not hurting the feelings of certain individuals is much more important than doing what it takes to actually win the war.
The fact remains that McCain was right and History will judge Bush as an abysmal war leader. We are one election result from losing a war that should already have been wrapped up.
BTW, Gen Petraeus would laugh at your assertion that Bush and Rummy did not want a better plan to counter the insurgency,
Sure they wanted a "better plan". Obama wants a "better plan". So do Ron Paul, Ralph Nader and Dennis Kucinich.
A child that is going to write to Santa Claus to bring him victory in Iraq wants a "better plan".
But, which plan worked?
The plan that McCain was championing against bitter opposition from 82% of public opinion and which Rumsfeld was opposed to.
The historical record documents the fact that Rumsfeld rejected the idea of The Surge.
Deal with the historical facts and not your hero-worshipping emotions, sweety.
*******
*******