Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT
I know that argument.

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)

30 posted on 02/28/2008 3:07:55 PM PST by roses of sharon (Who will be McCain's maverick?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]


To: roses of sharon

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.


35 posted on 02/28/2008 3:22:09 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson