Posted on 02/28/2008 1:59:12 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Senator John McCain stepped up his critique of Senator Barack Obama on Thursday by accusing him for the second consecutive day of a willingness to hand over Iraq to Al Qaeda, as the Democratic contenders released record-breaking fund-raising figures.
At a news conference at Hobby Airport in Houston, where Mr. McCain was endorsed by former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, Mr. McCain opened with a formulation of why he contended Mr. Obama is not ready to be commander in chief.
“On the issue of my differences with Senator Obama on Iraq, I want to make it very clear: This is not about decisions that were made in the past,” Mr. McCain said. “This is about decisions that a president will have to make about the future in Iraq. And a decision to unilaterally withdraw from Iraq will lead to chaos.”
Mr. McCain, the likely Republican nominee for president, was reacting to Mr. Obama’s response to a hypothetical question in a debate in Cleveland on Tuesday night, when Mr. Obama said that although he intended to withdraw American forces as quickly as possible, he reserved the right to send troops back if Al Qaeda were forming a base in Iraq.
“Al Qaeda is there now,” Mr. McCain said in Houston, with a tone of belittlement in his voice. “So to state that somehow if Al Qaeda were there that he would consider going back militarily is really a remarkable comment, and I don’t think displays an understanding of the size of the threat and what’s at stake in Iraq.”
Mr. Obama, speaking at a town hall event in Austin on Thursday, criticized Mr. McCain and President Bush over the handling of the economy.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
It’s past time for Republicans clear the propaganda away from the decision to go to Iraq.
************************EXCERPT**********************
Meanwhile, Senator John McCain of Arizona is leading the Republican hopefuls on a path of pathological disregard for the pain and suffering of people the world over, beginning with the poor and disenfranchised Americans. For thirty years, I have wondered what does this dazzling exercise in the democratic will of the people of the United States -- when from conservative and retrograde multimillionaires to liberal and progressive public servants fight head over heels for every single vote of ordinary or even poor people -- has to do with the rest of the world.
NRO/campaign spot
Jack Jacobs, MSNBC military analyst and a retired U.S. Army colonel:
Last week, during his debate with Clinton, Obama tried speaking about substance when he mentioned the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and he displayed an astounding ignorance of the military instrument. He said that an anonymous U.S. Army captain told him that his infantry platoon was split and sent to different areas of operations; that they were lacking vehicles; and that they had insufficient ammunition to fight.
Although problems do occur in combat situations to be sure, none of what Obama related makes any sense and is, according to people with whom I spoke, untrue. Units the size of platoons are not sent to separate theaters, ammunition has been plentiful, and an investigation indicates that the unit in question was missing only one of its Humvees, all to no peril of the unit.
Is that criticism of Barack HUSSEIN Obama? Thought we were NOT supposed to criticize him...
Caption:
John McCain: Just Waiting to F@ck You Over
That’s the President’s job. McCain can hit Obama on this simple and clear issue — Obama says he would send troops BACK if Al Qaeda was IN Iraq, but Al Qaeda is already IN Iraq, so we shouldn’t pull out.
Getting into a fight over what happened years ago might be fun for us, but is as McCain said irrelevant to the current issue of what to do with the troops NOW, and how to finish the job NOW.
Democrats are running as if electing them will turn back the clock and undo the Iraq war. McCain is calling them on it.
************************EXCERPT*****************************
Meanwhile, Senator John McCain of Arizona is leading the Republican hopefuls on a path of pathological disregard for the pain and suffering of people the world over, beginning with the poor and disenfranchised Americans. For thirty years, I have wondered what does this dazzling exercise in the democratic will of the people of the United States -- when from conservative and retrograde multimillionaires to liberal and progressive public servants fight head over heels for every single vote of ordinary or even poor people -- has to do with the rest of the world.
When I came to the United States in August 1976, the country was plunged in a deep moral apathy following the US atrocities and final defeat in Vietnam, the aggressive thinning out of the social synergy evident in the Civil Rights Movement, the onset of the Vietnam Syndrome, and above all the political anomie that had set in after the assassination of President John F Kennedy (1963), Malcolm X (1965), and Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr (1968), and then to top them all by the Watergate Scandal.
I didn’t save it but what Obama said was sneakier than that.
the gist of it was:
if they establish bases (in the future, doesn’t seem to count if they are already there) Obama will look out for American interests (not saying he’d get them out)
He is a brilliant wordsmith and lets you hear with your expectations as to what you might expect, hiding what is really there.
BUT, the reason I posted that question, is I am seriously thinking that this needs to be flushed out again, for those who haven’t a clue, and for those who have been misinformed all these years.
I just wanted to get feedback on it, sounds like you are against McCain going that route, OK, but he can do both at the same time, can’t he?
I just think the President has his hands full with the Dim congress right now, he has defeated them pretty good so far. He can of course help McCain in that argument.
I’m not sure McCain can argue it, without sounding like a Dim tho, lol. (he could slip into his hate Bush speak at any moment)
I think...for what ever reason....Mc?Cain wants to shape the attack.....in a way that is not yet clear....
McCain is smart to keep his barbs crisp and simple.
We ...in the USA use TWENTY NINE barrels of crude per capita annually ______ WHERE CHINA uses 2 barrels per capita annually.....
I think there is going to be a problem as China increases it's economic growth.
“Criticism” of Obama?
Tsk, tsk.
Mr. McLame you will cease any further criticism of the new president.
Louie Fare -a -con
He certainly COULD get into the argument. But it ties him to the disapproval people have for the war in a way that is unncessary. If Bush doesn’t think it’s important to defend his own actions, I just don’t see why McCain should take on that burden.
I think he could correct misstatements of fact about how we got into the war, but in general it’s best to pick ONE thing about your opponent and attack that — larger attacks blunt the effect.
Note that at any time, McCain can have Leiberman go out and defend the overall war — which would be a great move, as that would take it out of “politics”, and keep McCain from getting mired in a discussion of the past.
Meanwhile, our good conservative Senators can bring the arguments about WMD and Al Qaeda in Iraq before the war to Barack, without McCain being involved in that either.
Sydney? ...I didn’t know.
Alfred E. Obama
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.