Posted on 05/15/2008 3:38:12 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I just got off of another teleconference with John McCain. Here are my notes, not quotes, from the teleconference.
McCain's Opening Statement
I gave a speech this morning about how I would want America to look after my first term in office in 2013. I want people to see what I want to do. By 2013, I think we will have won in Iraq. There may be sporadic fighting or attacks by Jihadists, but the Iraqi military would have control of the country and American troops would be out of harm's way, even though we may still have our troops in the country.
I'd be glad to debate Obama or Hillary on whether the surge is working and whether we are winning right now. It's long, hard, tough -- and was mishandled for four years -- and I fought against that failed strategy, but in 2013 we will have won. That won't mean everything is perfect, but we will not have chaos, genocide, increasing Iranian influence -- and we'd have to go back. That's what would happen if Obama gets his way.
Q&A Session
What are your views of what is happening in Lebanon and do you think we should be talking to Iran? Also, Bush talked about the dangers of appeasement. Some comment on that?
Bush says he wasn't talking about Obama and there are plenty of examples in history of the danger of appeasement. I think one of the reasons the Democrats got so upset is because Obama is really naive to want to sit down with Iran. They pronounced Israel as a "stinking corpse," they're sending weapons into Iraq that are killing Americans, and they're a terrorist state.
In Lebanon, we essentially see a proxy war between the US and Iran. If Senator Obama wants to sit down across the table from Iran, what is it that he wants to talk about with them? The belief that communication has to be done face to face is unacceptable and that shows Obama doesn't have the knowledge, experience, or background to safeguard this country. I look forward to having that debate with him.
What would it take for you to sit down with Iran?
I would have Iran renounce their intention to wipe Israel off the map. If they did that and promised not to pursue nuclear devices -- and stopped training people to kill Americans in Iraq and their sponsorship of terrorist organizations like Hezbollah, then perhaps we can have a meaningful discussion.
They are not interested in doing these things because they are trying to realize age-old Persian ambitions in the region. What does he want to talk to them about? All he would end up doing is giving them a prestige enhancement and more sway in the region.
How do you hold your opponent accountable when his staff flat-out lies and the media covers for him?
Obama says he's going to unilaterally negotiate NAFTA. Canada said that they might sell their oil to China if that happens. But, in NC, he says he's a free trader. He's changing positions. He's inconsistent and contradicts himself.
Have you talked to Newt about issues?
I have talked to him a few times, have watched him on TV, and have read a couple of his books. I would be pleased to have conversations with Newt because I think he has some of the best ideas in this country. I intend to talk to him from time to time because I think he's a very smart person.
You say that you're against subsidies, but you favor helping nuclear power. How do you reconcile this?
The problems with nuclear power are of our own making. We don't reprocess nuclear fuel. It takes 10-15 years to get a nuclear power plant going. The Yucca Mountain gridlock is remarkable. I want to encourage research and push very hard for nuclear power. I think it's important to reduce greenhouse gasses. We should invest in clean coal technology as well. I have always supported government investment in research and development.
Why did you announce a timeline to leave Iraq? (Hawkins' Note: What a stupid question.)
Either you didn't read or understand my speech. I know that we're going to win in Iraq as we did in WWII and the Gulf War. With victory comes the withdrawal of troops. You don't set a date for withdrawal. There is no date for surrender. I will have it dictated by the facts on the ground.
Let me explain the difference: if you announce a date for withdrawal as Obama and Clinton want to do, it means you are surrendering, and the bad guys just wait for the date.
How do you plan to take care of those troops when they do come home?
I've been recognized time and time again for supporting the troops by veterans' organizations. I will do everything I can to care for them. I believe in improving health care for vets. I want to increase their educational benefits. I also want to encourage people to stay in the military. I will match my credentials with veterans with Clinton or Obama any time.
You say you want to work towards bipartisanship. What positions would you be willing to appoint Democrats to in your administration?
I have a clear record of working with Democrats. I don't have a specific position in mind, but I will ask the most capable people, Democrat or Republican, for a position. I will appoint Democrats to my administration.
Summary: I gotta tell you: McCain sounded good in this teleconference. He trafficked in ideas, he had an appealing vision for the future, and he drew pointed comparisons between what he wanted to do and what Obama wants to do at every opportunity. For all of his flaws, McCain comes across as a tough, experienced leader -- and an unaccomplished empty suit like Barack Obama is really going to come across like a lightweight compared to McCain once people start getting down to brass tacks and making the decision between the two of them.
PS: Go here to check out John McCain's vision for America in 2013. I don't agree with every single thing, but overall, it's a pretty picture, especially compared to the sort of socialism that Obama wants to inflict on the country.
PS #2: The teleconference was packed and although I wanted to ask him a question, I didn't get the opportunity. However, they did tell us we could email in questions and I sent the following question, which I would have asked, to the campaign to get a response,
Mr. McCain, let me read something you were quoted as saying a few days ago, "We get in this kind of a circular firing squad on immigration reform in the Congress of the United States and the lesson I learned from it is we’ve got to have comprehensive immigration reform."
Now, you've been saying for months that you learned your lesson and that we need security first, not a comprehensive immigration bill. That doesn't seem to gibe with that quote. So, could you elaborate a bit?
When I get a response, I will post it to RWN.
Norman, therein lies the problem with McCain and the Republicans in general. Stop trying to "free market" liberal ideas. So his cap plan is lower than Hillary/Obama. That's the same BS as being in favor of "sensible" gun control laws rather than a total gun ban. Global warming is a scam. If McCain's such a straight talker, why can't he just come out and say it?
I appreciate the way you defend McCain and not resort to the condescension that other McCain supporters do. But it's not looking good for him. You think the moderates and independents are going to vote for him and replace the votes of the conservative base that will stay home or vote 3rd party?
There's no guarantee with McCain either. He'll be faced with an overwhelmingly Rat Senate anyway who won't approve anyone to the right of Ginsburg.
You realize how permits are handed out only effects HOW the Pain will be distributed and means absolutely nothing as to the actual impact of the legislation or cost to the economy, don't you? Giving the permits away, without a separate redistribution scheme, will result in the costs being absorbed by the poorer households (see CBO reports which label this method as "regressive.")
While I don’t agree with McCain on this he has moderated his plan with a number of free market ideas.
There is nothing "free market" about the McCain plan to CAP and REGULATE and SUBSIDIZE. See the Heritage Foundation assessment: McCain's Global Warming Plan Threatens Economy (Heritage Foundation)
McCain also puts forward real ways to cut emissions and get energy independence as opposed to Obama-Gore.
There is no substantive difference.
For example: nuclear. McCain wants 20 news reactors under construction in the next 5 years. He is also eager to move forward on waste storage, which Obama is definitely hung up on (permanently, Read: No more nukes).
Since there are already 31 reactors in the pipeline scheduled to be in construction by 2010, I guess achieving 65% of that by 2013 doesn't seem impossible.
I’ll have to get back to you, sweetie. :^)
I don’t agree with that. Until 1994, it had been a Dem senate for decades and Reagan and Bush got hundreds of decent judges through with very few hold ups or rejections. Fact is the president is the mover and congress is simply going to have to confirm judges. McCain’s will be right of center just like Bush, his father, and Reagan before him. It’s not so much the person as the pool - there are two - McCain will be drawing from the Republican/conservative/federalist pool.
Sure did. Cohen was one. There were a few sub-cabinet GOPers IIRC.
I never cease to be amazed at how gullible conservatives can be when it comes to these RINO candidates. The man, through his deeds, has proved that he is unworthy of conservative support, but some people think he is great when he says the right things in a presidential campaign. My family and I are not fooled.
If your going to complain about a candidate, or anything for that matter, the complainant should offer some viable alternative, otherwise its just whining. McCain, all other warts aside, has stated that he would appoint Alito’s, Roberts' and Scalea’s. What has Obama promised?
“Conservatives” are becoming suicidal over this.
And your "feel good about my vote" gesture will be meaningless. You dont have good choices, but that does not mean you have to act like a lib and just make yourself feel good, the heck with the results of your actions or inactions.
You dont want to win. Like way too many "conservatives" you just want to whine. Grow up. Be a man (or woman if you are) and make some hard choices instead of taking your marbles and running home. This country wasn't born from such cowards.
Dont take this personally, but I am just sick of all the conservative whining lately. Win the election and then put pressure on the party. Ring the phones off the hooks. If you give the democrats the presidency, this nations blood will have been spent in vain, we will be seen as weak, we will be attacked again, and our justice system WILL be liberalized. Both lib candidates have told us this with straight faces.
Maybe not (though I think he did the token repub), but Clinton and company were crooks.
John McCain makes me sick!
He doesn't sit well with me either, but he's not a crook.
I'll look forward to it.
I've got lots more links if you'd like to learn about McCain's positions on Global Warming. ;-)
I gotta be honest with you. I really don’t care about global warming. I don’t agree with McCain on everything.
No problem. Perhaps, then, you will desist from posting misleading and erroneous comments about McCain's positions until you gain an interest and learn about it. It will save everyone time.
Thanks, sweetie. ;-)
Erroneous, sure. Misleading, never. By the way I was certainly wrong about the reactors. Apparently McCain wants many, many more reactors built in the coming years. Yay!
So you'll knowingly continue to post misleading info?
By the way I was certainly wrong about the reactors. Apparently McCain wants many, many more reactors built in the coming years. Yay!
I'm all for nuclear, but I don't give McCain any special credit. There are currently 31 reactors in the pipeline to be in construction by 2010. McCain says he'll have 20 in construction by 2013. In other words, his vision is to get 67% of what is already planned accomplished in 250% of the time. Perhaps he could aim a bit higher?
Sheesh. I just admitted that like everyone else I’m sometimes wrong. But I never intentionally mislead. I was wrong about the 20 reactors apparently: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2018144/posts (Granted it sounds like a bit of exaggeration by the author but McCain is gung-ho about nuclear.)
You say our justice system will be liberalized, (and)both lib candidates have told us this with straight faces. Well, you mean all 3 candidates!>>Put pressure on the party? The “party”, with its powerful and moneyed good old boys and girls, has had pressure from conservatives for years; you think they listen, or even care? McCain has been declaring conservatism dead for a long time: Globalism is here, he tells us, so get used to it! Forget borders, language and culture; give up JudeoChristian beliefs, after all, 2 cars in every garage is so yesterday, your future, thanks to ClintoonBush, is a mosque (arsenal)by every shopping center in every town across the former America. Well, screw McCain and the “party”. The only answer, (how tempting to say “blowin’ in the wind”!)is to form a new party, a conservative party with the true virtues the former Republican party (RIP)once had. With the first item of business to end the wanton slaughter of unborn and newborn babies! This is our only hope.
The leftist will also push through full implementation of the Fairness Doctrine, which will officially end the existence of free speech throughout the U.S. while also killing off U.S. conservatism at every level, and leftist will also legally allow illegal immigrants to vote in all future U.S. elections at every level throughout the U.S.! These two actions will keep socialism alive forever throughout the U.S. unless a civil war does eventually break out between conservatives and leftists.
LOL. That's why he voted for him?
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.