McCain stumbles while attempting to explain his Iraq oil remarks.
McCain stumbles while attempting to explain his Iraq oil remarks.
At a townhall event yesterday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) implied that the U.S. went to war in Iraq over oil, saying that if America had energy independence that would “prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East. Later, on his campaign plane, McCain tried to clarify his remarks, claiming that he was talking about the “the first Gulf War.” Pressed by a reporter, McCain stumbled when asked if he was actually “thinking about the first Gulf War” when he made the statement:
But then when specifically asked by an Associated Press reporter if, when he made the statement, he was “thinking about the first Gulf War,” he said no.
“No, I was thinking about- it’s not hard to- we will not,” McCain stumbled. “By eliminating our dependency on foreign oil, we will not have to have our national security threatened by a cut off of that oil. Because we will be dependent, because we won’t be dependent, we will no longer be dependent on foreign oil. That’s what my remarks were.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
92 Responses to “McCain stumbles while attempting to explain his Iraq oil remarks.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
He stumbles, misspeaks and forgets a lot, doesn't he?
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:27 amOh yeah. Sen. McWar -- the expert on foreign policy. Will the media give him a pass on this idiotic nonsense? Odds are all talking heads will do just that. Make your bet.
Happy Derby Day from Louisville KY.
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:34 amOf course the Iraq war is about oil. All wars are fought over resources; either trying to get someone elses or protecting your own. It's just not politically expedient to come right out and say it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:36 amAs a theoretical example, if it turned out all the world's oil was drying up except for a huge reserve sitting under Saddam Hussein's Iraq, do you think the American people would support an invasion of Iraq? Absolutely. All moral considerations about whether it's "right" to invade a sovereign nation would go out the window. The real situation was just a grayer shade of that example.
John McCain is suffering from althermiers, but the media and his campaign are unwilling to admit it. The media has tried everything it could to protect him by under reporting or not reporting all of the gaffes that he's made over the past few months. I wrote the NY Times asking them to do a story of all of the mistakes he's made while campaigning, but of course they refused too. If the media did accurately report all of the stumbles he's made voters would start to see what I've seen.
Just think about that grandpa you had who did the same thing before it was discovered that he had althemiers. This man is too old to be President and we are headed for a diaster if dumb voters elect him. I personally like Sen. McCain, but I wouldn't vote for him because I see an old grandpa walking around trying to hide his memory loss and inability to think clearly. If the media is forced to accurately cover him, then he'll fall apart before the election is even held. If McCain were to be elected people behind the scenes will be pulling the strings because he'll basically be a puppet.
How can the American people be stupid enough to elect an 82 year old man to the highest office in the world? Anyone who watches John McCain closely has seen any aging grandpa would is losing it by the minute. I'm sorry but am 50 years old and I know I can't remember what I had for breakfast yesterday. An 82 year old is just too old and we can't afford to take that chance. After all we don't vote for a President based on who he picks for VP. Besides the age thing, this isn't the McCain we all know and loved from the 2000 campaign. This is John McPander Bear, who has sold his soul to the rightwing of his party. And if elected he'd be another Bush. We don't need two idiots in a row, America just could survive that.
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:47 amPsst: The Shadow.
Don't you mean Alzheimer's?
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:54 am#4. It's Alzheimer's and McCain is 71 not 82, but I agree with the rest of your post. (71 is still to old for this job)
May 3rd, 2008 at 9:56 amHey Shadow,
Correction, it would make it three idiots in a row. Bush is so stupid, it should count for two.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:06 amEvery time he opens his mouth, McCain might as well say "My friends, ah-buh-dee, ah-buh-dee, ah-buh-dee, that's all, folks."
Then, the only clarifying, correcting, or re-stating he'd have to do is the "my friends" phrase.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:07 amYou could cover almost any base with a selected quote from McCain's latest stumbling. As an old codger nearly McCain's age, I can vouch for the occasional lapsus memoriae, but, then again, I'm not running for office!
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:11 amWhilst McCain doesn't torture vocabulary like Bush he is just as incoherent and inconsistent.
So, anyway, McCain is proposing to eliminate "our dependence on foreign oil". Foreign oil makes up 70% of the total US consumption.
So what's the McPlan, McCain?
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:14 amIf you want take this and say 'see, the war in Iraq was for oil'. Have at it. I believe it was for more reasons than oil, but it doesn't matter.
Isn't what McCain proposing (energy independence) a good idea?
If I said 'okay, your right, the war in Iraq was for oil', would you be able to move on?
And even if the war in Iraq was for oil, does it change the situation that we are in today?
If the war in Iraq was unjustly fought over oil, does that give us the green light to leave, even though the democratically elected leaders of Iraq want us to stay and help stabilize the situation?
What McCain is proposing is a sound idea. You should support it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:16 am'Scuse me, Sen McSenile, shouldn't we then add $1 - 2 trillion when fuzzily figurin' our oil expenditures? Wouldn't that make oil (for us, not for anyone else) about $400/bbl? And how much of that goes overseas paying interest and shoddily reconstructing what we knock down so we can knock it down again? Wouldn't it be cheaper just to hand out FREE PONIES FOR EVERYONE! WHEE!
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:18 amYes we can! No we can't!
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:27 amto Backup @ 14:
If Sen. McCain were truly interested in reducing foreign dependency, then where would the summer-tax-free, consume-all-you-want plan fit in with this theory?
This is a most ill-conceived idea that has ZERO support of economists, regardless of party affiliation -- they're knockin' Sen. Clinton for supporting it.
How 'bout vouchers for public transportation instead? Or, for rural areas, some other credit. Not, though, an elimination of taxes that would -- by all accounts -- reduce 300,000 highway construction/repair jobs, since that's what the bulk of the tax funds.
Pure political pandering.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:31 ambackup Says:
What McCain is proposing is a sound idea. You should support it.
Really... We should support what McCain proposes.
Which idea? The one he proposed yesterday or what he changed it to today?
Yeah, just listen to McCain, if you don't like what he proposes today, give is a few hours or a day or so, he will change it eventually to something you can support. The candidate for everyone, long as you don't compare one statement with another one he has made, then try to make sense of it.
Just support what he says, like backup here says, without worry that put together what he says has no logical reasoning behind it.
Psst, backup.... hand me some of that sh!t you are smoking, must be some pretty good stuff.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:32 amSince when do foreign leaders dictate our foreign policies? Why should America be spending our money and lives to stabilize a civil war? Only an Anti-American could possibly want our troops and our dollars going to police someone else's nation.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:39 amcavjam Says:
FREE PONIES FOR EVERYONE! WHEE!
**Disclosure tag: Enclosed ponies may have rabies and they do bite.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:40 amMore-of-the-same McCain is a senile old goat roper. he can't keep his lies in order and then has to lie more to try to straighten out what he's said. he's so hard to try to please the PNAC true believers and the christian conservanazis. he will do ANYTHING to get elect.
Check out the US military's Code of Conduct. Not familiar with it. It was a guidance for soldiers/airmen/sailors/marines if and when they were captured. I believe giving confessions on international radio was a violation. Then, investigate Sen. McSame's history in N. Vietnam. The only reason this guy is a hero is because of his father. he's no friend to veterans. No friend to his fellow POWs.
BUCK FUSH AND THE SAME FOR McSAME!
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:40 amIt's very scary. If by some crazy chance McCain becomes the president, it'll be another Ronald Reagan, falling asleep at meetings with world leaders and first lady Cindy Lou whispering answers into Johnny's ear in reponse to reporters' questions. Nancy and Ronnie all over again. When an elderly lady was asked by her pastor if she ever thinks about the hereafter, she replied, "Every day. Whenever I walk into a room, I say to myself, now what was I hereafter?"
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:44 amReally… We should support what McCain proposes.
Which idea? The one he proposed yesterday or what he changed it to today?
Yeah, just listen to McCain, if you don’t like what he proposes today, give is a few hours or a day or so, he will change it eventually to something you can support. The candidate for everyone, long as you don’t compare one statement with another one he has made, then try to make sense of it.
This is actually amusing, because I recall the Republican debates and the sarcasm McCain aimed at Romney about his changing his statements from day to day.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:48 amIf I said ‘okay, your right, the war in Iraq was for oil’, would you be able to move on?
I might, but any of the 4000+ dead Americans, or the tens of thousands with lost limbs or other crippling injuries, or their families, might not be able to just "move on" that easily.
This is why we need a draft. Without it, people can talk about the devastation of war as if it were some minor insult, because they aren't personally affected.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:48 amWe will always be dependent on foreign oil until this country finds good alternative fuels, better mass transportation, and eliminates selling gas guzzling vehicles.
It was nice to hear that sub-compact sales had gone up. Finally, we have some americans that are actually thinking.
The government needs to put pressure on the big three auto manufacturers to step up to the plate and start putting out more vehicles that get at least 35 to 50 miles a gallon. They have had the technology for a very long time.
Plus, we know that McCain will never come up with a good Energy Plan. If it is anything like his ludicrous attempt at a Health Care Plan, what a waste of paper(and a perfectly good tree) it will be...
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:50 amMcCain had a senior moment. He just forgot that you're not supposed to admit the obvious truth.
-B
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:55 amFreedom Rebel
I, too, am thinking about a small car purchase with 30+ mpg -- maybe a Kia Rio, under 11K.
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:58 amMcCain puts the pain in campaign. (Or is it Hillary?)
May 3rd, 2008 at 10:59 amBackup…
What McCain is “proposing” is that we should all get ice cream and ponies.
“Energy independence” isn’t a ‘sound’ idea; it is a glib and meaningless catchphrase.
Granted McCain really means that we should reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Trouble is foreign oil makes up 70% of US consumption and the US doesn’t have enough potential reserves of its own to make a difference. So, what to do?
We have to reduce our consumption of oil and find alternative energy sources. More efficient cars, if we want to keep our cars, would be some help, but the Republicans and their financiers have always been against that and are against that now.
More efficient light bulbs would be a help, but the GOP is against that.
Solar energy could be used to help power houses and workplaces, but the Republicans are against that (Reagan tore down the solar panels Jimmy Carter had installed on the White House). It goes on and on.
How is McCain going to be able to do anything about the energy crisis when he and his colleagues are bankrolled by the interests who OPPOSE alternative energy?
Oh yeah, and spare use your concern about leaving Iraq. The “democratically elected leaders of Iraq” aren’t a functioning government and don’t represent the Iraqi population, the majority of whom want the US to leave. By your argument the British should have set up an American government of their own, sustained by British money and British troops.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:02 amWhat a miserable way to start another day..Yesterday TP had 5 thread's on mcnut's, the day before 6 and now your starting the day off with more on this crazy ass..
Your loosing it TP...I going where there's more than mc nut's to read about...
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:02 amWhat W1 said.
Good morning TP, still pondering my idea to wrap all McCain posts into one daily roundup?
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:09 amFreedom Rebel
"I, too, am thinking about a small car purchase with 30+ mpg — maybe a Kia Rio, under 11K."
What?! And take more jobs away from Americans?
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:10 amYou should by an ALL-AMERICAN 30+ MPG car for $11K, like the,,,, the ummm.... that.....oh...errr...or maybe the...ooh.. darn it!
backup Says:
If the war in Iraq was unjustly fought over oil, does that give us the green light to leave, even though the democratically elected leaders of Iraq want us to stay and help stabilize the situation?
Stabilize the situation? For at least 3 years we have been told on quite a few occasions by quite a few people that the Iraqi security forces will be able to take over control of their country in a few weeks...in a few months...by the end of summer...by the end of the year...in 6 months...etc...etc. Hasn't happened, has it? What is their incentive if we are going to stay indefinitely to hold their hands until they are ready, if ever?
By the way, Bush, Bremer, Powell, and Sen. Mitch McConnell have all said in the past that we'd leave Iraq if the Iraqis asked us to leave. I've got the sources if you'd like. Yet if a Democrat or any one against this war demands that Bush bring home the troops, suddenly they are labeled as terrorist sympathizers and troop-haters, and Bush tells us in no uncertain terms that it's "up to the generals on the ground" to make that decision.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:10 amYes but he doesn't believe in it and you are a fool to believe him as you believed bush when he was lying to you.
Sounds reasonable considering the act of lying us into an unjustified war was criminal? I don't think so. This will haunt you for a long time.
Yes, it is time to acknowledge mistakes made by more honerable people who were lied to about the facts.
This is just a last ditch effort to continue a failed policy. When will you admit that this cannot have a good outcome?
Mccain seems to have lots of good ideas but he changes his mind the very next day and none of the good ideas he tries to float are his ideas. He is just saying whatever he thinks people want to hear, just like bush did. You really should stop giving your support to people who lie to you while looking you in the eye.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:15 amMcWars...McCain Wrap
I'd be on board with that. McCain deserves the attention as the GOP candidate, but there's PLENTY else to keep an eye on and discuss.
I'll send a direct note in support of the suggestion.
Maybe it could be called "MCain's World!--Grand Old Party On! Excrement!"
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:17 amNo, no; these are friendly and disease-free free ponies, ponies which run on sunlight and poop gold coins.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:18 amTP has The Wonk Room and Attackerman. All they need to do is add McCainLand and fill it daily with John's stupid comments and flippity flops.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:19 amFritz Says:
He stumbles, misspeaks and forgets a lot, doesn’t he?
Yes, unfortunately the only people who know are people like you and me. The Sheeple don't know because the MSM doesn't report on his gaffes.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:19 amRe: Freedom Rebel.
Consider this: in 1998 I bought a new Dodge Neon that was rated at 40 MPG on the highway; occasionally checking my mileage, I've seen a high of 39. It's no slouch, putting out 150 horsepower and clocked at 0-60 MPH in 7.6 seconds by a Car and Driver road test. 10 years later (and this is true even before the EPA changed the process for calculating mileage figures), the smallest car Dodge is producing (the Calibur) gets LESS mileage from a gal. of gas than the Neon.
The car companies will only work towards higher mileage if the consumer demands it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:23 amPatty and Wayne. I'm afraid your both right.
The gas tax holiday is a bad idea. I agree with the free ponies sentiment.
The the flip flop argument also has some weight.
I'm on board with the energy independence idea, but McCain needs to be consistent if he wants a serious shot at winning.
You're right.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:24 amI think the thing I find odd, is just how much of a free pass by the press McCain is getting. Obama says pretty much anything in is shot down as an elitist. McCain has numerous senior moments, and not a peep.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:26 amThe war in Iraq was about oil, corporate dollars and Bush's inner child wanting to trump the father. That's it. Nothing else. We all know it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:26 amMcCain admits the oil part instinctively because at heart he tells the truth. He could even be an honorable person. But for his handlers. They obviously got to him in the interim between the two statements.
I call BS, and I've had a belly full of BS. McCain wants the presidency so badly that he will sacrifice his own integrity. Sad but true.
It does matter.....maybe not to you but to the majority of Americans it damn sure does matter. You will see the results soon.....please stop acting like people are going to continue to support what has gone on for the last 7 years. It is now affecting people and they are denouncing all of the failed policies of the gop.
I live in a really red state and even the old die hards are ready for a change and mccain aint it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:32 amFreedom Rebel Says:
We will always be dependent on foreign oil until this country finds good alternative fuels, better mass transportation, and eliminates selling gas guzzling vehicles.
Or until the world's oil supply runs out. Most experts think that Peak Oil has come and gone. Every year China guzzles more and more oil. Since they pretty much own us, if the oil becomes scarce, they have a way of making sure that they get what's left, not us.
If McBush truly wants the US to be energy independent, where are his plans? Where were his plans? This is the first I've heard of it.
One thing I wonder about, does McBush have a speech writer? Or does he wing it and wander off the reservation. If he has a speech writer, and that's what John McBush is delivering, then he really does need to get a new writer.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:48 am5th Estate Says:
What?! And take more jobs away from Americans?
You should by an ALL-AMERICAN 30+ MPG car for $11K, like the,,,, the ummm…. that…..oh…errr…or maybe the…ooh.. darn it!
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:10 am
That had me laughing for a few minutes.
I seem to forget the remaining American car factories, for the most part, are not American-owned.
I’d be on board with that. McCain deserves the attention as the GOP candidate, but there’s PLENTY else to keep an eye on and discuss.
I’ll send a direct note in support of the suggestion.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:17 am
I do appreciate that. gummitch's idea of adding a tab right next to Attackerman and Wonk Room also bodes well to get TP's front page back to its mission of healthy communities, global leadership, social and economic justice, and a secure America, as well as what they're fighting against.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:58 amI call BS, and I’ve had a belly full of BS. McCain wants the presidency so badly that he will sacrifice his own integrity. Sad but true.
He checked his integrity at the door the day he began his current run for the Presidency. He has to kiss up to the hard right and in doing so he has sold his soul to the devil.
BTW, I read an interesting article the other day, I wish I had bookmarked it. The article was saying that John McCain was never really a "moderate". The writer thought that McCain was a calculating politician who was trying to set himself apart from the rest of the Republicans by staking out some pretty universally accepted positions that went against the grain of the hard right. But, the writer had examined McCain's voting record and came to the conclusion that his "maverick, moderate" image was just that, an image he had created without a voting record to back it up. As an example, McCain would like us to believe that he is an environmentalist. How many times have you seen signs to that affect behind McCain at a rally? The League of Conservation Voters gives McCain a lifetime score of 24. Another thing the writer noticed was that McCain misses a lot of votes and coincidentally most of the votes he misses are on controversial issues. That way he can say he didn't vote against a certain bill.
The bottom line is that McCain scares the begeezes out of me. Bush is scary because he isn't really there and his handlers are running the show. McCain scares me because he is bat-shit crazy and I'm fairly sure that HE will be running the show if he is elected.
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:59 amMeanwhile at the McCain campaign HQ..
Campaign manager: "We should highlight his personal history more.."
Strategist: "Yes I agree. Where is John anyway?"
Campaign manager: "I dont know I thought Greg was with him?"
Greg: "Huh me? I thought he was with you guys?"
Campaign manager: "Oh my God we have to find him! Greg search the parking lot. Ill check the mens room.."
Greg: "Too late. Look hes on TV.."
Strategist: "Oh crap.."
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:00 pmFred. Your post in 34 was well written.
The only thing I would comment on is this:
If Democrats, that now control Congress, really have 'the goods' on Bush, why don't they impeach him. If what you believe about Bush getting us into war is true, it would be 'a slam dunk'.
I suspect you may believe that Democrats are unable to overcome the few Republicans it would take to make it happen. But, couldn't they take the evidence to the American people to pressure those same Republicans?
The Bush lied and the foray into Iraq was illegal charge, just doesn't seem to hold up, when you consider the Democratic inaction.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pmOh, Lord, McSame is planning on not just mimmicking Bush's policies, but also his facility with language.
Four more years, anyone?
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pmCall me crazy, but I just had an epiphany. I am beginning to believe that the Republicans aren't going to run McCane as the candidate. I think what they are doing is running out the clock on the campaign. They are allowing McCain to be out there as the chosen target. But, at their convention on September 1, I bet they back another candidate, probably Romney, with the excuse that McCain is too old or too sick to run for President. How clever is that? At that time there will be barely two months left before the election. Not much time for the Democrats to fight back. In the meantime the Republicans will be bloodying the Democratic candidate. Romney will step in and be fresh and new.
This is so diabolical, it must be true. It certainly sounds like something the Republicans would do.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:03 pmQuiet everyone, OK McLame, explain this plan.......? Silence.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:05 pmbackup Says:
If the war in Iraq was unjustly fought over oil, does that give us the green light to leave, even though the democratically elected leaders of Iraq want us to stay and help stabilize the situation?
This troll is certainly ignorant. The democratically elected leaders of Iraq (the Parliament) want us to leave. The puppet government installed by Bush (the Maliki government) does not want us to leave. This troll also neglected to mention the fact that 70% of the people in Iraq want us to leave. What kind of a democracy ignores the will of it's people? Oh yeah...I forgot, we have that kind of a democracy so why not Iraq.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:06 pmI agree with the sentiment that McCain has been pandering and it's causing him to flip flop. That is a problem for me. He needs to stick with what he really believes (assuming he has core beliefs). I respect Obama for opposing the gas tax holiday.
But, the polling data doesn't necessarily reflect the landslide you predict. Everyone in this race seems to have their own problems.
For McCain, he needs to stand up for whatever principles he has, and spend less time worrying about what other people want to hear. More leadership and less pandering.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:08 pmTHIS is your argument that Bush didn't lie us into war???
Cap'n, your current attempts to portray yourself as a reasonable moderate (much like John McCain) notwithstanding, your rhetoric is still very, very weak. Perhaps someday I will cease hoping you can raise your game, and just accept it as the best you can do.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:09 pmIf Democrats, that now control Congress, really have ‘the goods’ on Bush, why don’t they impeach him. If what you believe about Bush getting us into war is true, it would be ‘a slam dunk’.
Another ignorant post by the ignorant troll. It really thinks that a majority of 1 in the Senate would be enough to vote to impeach. In order to convict, 2/3 of the Senate (67) has to vote to convict.
I believe that the Democrats should have brought Articles of Impeachment simply because by doing that, Bush would not be able to declare EP every time Congress wants to investigate one of his crimes.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:11 pmbackup Says:
But, the polling data doesn’t necessarily reflect the landslide you predict. Everyone in this race seems to have their own problems.
It does it again. It really thinks that polling data today accurately reflects the will of the people. It must be forgetting that 6 months ago Hillary Clinton lead the pack of Democrats by 20%. That shows you how accurate national polling is.
Once the Democrats introduce the Sheeple to the real John McSame, his polling numbers are going to plummet. But, that's assuming he is the candidate in September. I really think that he is not going to be the Republican candidate after the convention.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:14 pmgalmud Says:
Greg: “Huh me? I thought he was with you guys?”
Campaign manager: “Oh my God we have to find him! Greg search the parking lot. Ill check the mens room..”
Greg: “Too late. Look hes on TV..”
Strategist: “Oh crap..”
That is hilarious. I'm dyng here :)
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:19 pmralph. I know you think I'm an idiot. But, please bare with me.
You're asking me to believe that the Democrats have evidence that Bush lied us into an unjust war. But, they don't want to act on it. Why?
You have people that lead the Congress, that have the ability to impeach Bush for his crimes and stop the troops and innocent civilian causualties for a lost cause, and they aren't acting; for what reason?
I might be an idiot - but, I don't get that. The only conclusion that my limited mind can draw, is that they were pandering to you, and they don't really have any significant evidence of their charges. Help me.
Why do the Democrats that control Congress refuse to act?
If the evidence is as strong as you suggest it is, wouldn't it be easy to reveal it to the American people and right the wrongs you lament. And, BTW, they are also politicians. Wouldn't producing the evidence for all to see, hurt Republicans and help Democrats?
Educate me.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:20 pmIf you take out the sumbling, McCain basically said:
“By eliminating our dependency on foreign oil......we will no longer be dependent on foreign oil. That’s what my remarks were.”
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:22 pmbackup Says:
I might be an idiot - but, I don’t get that. The only conclusion that my limited mind can draw, is that they were pandering to you, and they don’t really have any significant evidence of their charges. Help me.
There is no help for ignorant fools like this one. It not only can't spell it also can't do the math. Of course Congress doesn't have "significant evidence". Exactly how is Congress supposed to get the evidence with Bush declaring everything off limits because of EP and telling his minions to ignore subpoenas. Since Bush has packed the courts, following up on ignoring subpoenas is pretty much a hopeless proposition. If the courts don't side with the Bush Crime Family they will hold things up until they run out the clock.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:29 pmPseudonym Says:
If you take out the sumbling, McCain basically said:
“By eliminating our dependency on foreign oil……we will no longer be dependent on foreign oil. That’s what my remarks were.”
Genius, pure genius. I wonder why no one ever thought of that before. When McCain starts suggesting methods of conservation and fuel economy, wake us up.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:29 pmThis guy can't talk straight for shit honestly.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:33 pmBy eliminating our dependency on foreign oil……we will no longer be dependent on foreign oil. That’s what my remarks were.”
A new, (sort of) improved "Endeavor to Persevere!"
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:33 pmYou conviently ignore the obvious. The economy is in the tank....if you want to defend that then we don't have the basis for a discussion of any kind. People will vote out people who hurt them. If they feel it in their pocketbooks, and they do, they will vote against any continuation.
None of the democratic frontrunners has anything like the problems that mccain has and that will become evident as the light is shined on him after the primary....I predict it will be a landslide. Only those with a desire to continue our failed path would think that this can be allowed to continue.
I'm not going to list the failures of the gop for you again, maybe you could show us just one success story that has come from the gop in the last...well ever?
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:39 pmSuggestion TP,
Why not just create a whole separate page (Like Wonk Room and Attackerman) dedicated to just John McCain posts? Save this page for the rest of the world news. He could fill a whole page by himself. And progressives would be concerned about everything he says, so there's a legitimate reason to cover him constantly. But the other topics tend to get lost amid all the McCain threads.
Just a suggestion. Keep a very close watching on him. He is not the "maverick" he has let the media portray him to be, and he is lining himself up to get all the votes of the Bush supporters. And when you combine his well-known hot temper with a well-documented tendency to get confused about the basic facts, he is a presidential candidate (how the hell does that happen?) who bears close watching.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:41 pm#27 McWars Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Freedom Rebel
I, too, am thinking about a small car purchase with 30+ mpg — maybe a Kia Rio, under 11K.
I bought a Nissan Sentra a couple years ago and I'm getting better gas mileage than what was stated on the window. I'm up to 31 miles to a gallon. I heard Kia Rio's are nice good running cars. I have not heard anything negative at all. Check out Nissan's though. This makes my 3rd one (Had Altimas too) I get 10 years out of each no problem. Then trade them in... Have a great day McWars!!!
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:52 pm# 5th Estate Says:
Freedom Rebel
“I, too, am thinking about a small car purchase with 30+ mpg — maybe a Kia Rio, under 11K.”
What?! And take more jobs away from Americans?
You should by an ALL-AMERICAN 30+ MPG car for $11K, like the,,,, the ummm…. that…..oh…errr…or maybe the…ooh.. darn it!
LOL Pretty funny!!!... If only the big 3 would get on board, I might consider buying something they are making...
In all defense to my Nissan purchase my Altima was completely made in the USA. No parts from Mexico...
Have a great day 5th Estate...
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:58 pmA recession is two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. Even though the economy has been experiencing very slow growth, we have yet to have even one quarter of negative GDP growth.
We did have a recession (2 consecutive quarters of GDP growth shortly after Bush took office in 2001-02). If you had to assign responsiblity for it, most would say it was the result of Clinton Economic policy.
How can the economy be worse now (with no consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth) than it was when we were in an actual recession?
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm@ #57... dying not dyng ;)
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:12 pmBilbo.
If congress doesn't have significant evidence, then I assume you don't have significant evidence (because you could just give it to them and wrap this whole thing up).
If you don't have the evidence, you're assuming that it exists. I understand you want to subpeona the administration for alot of things. I get it.
But, you're charging Bush is a criminal with no evidence.
That doesn't make sense to me.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:16 pmRight, you're telling me that 8 years of stagnant job growth while the population soars, high food and gas prices, health care cost per month being more than I ever paid for a home, drug costs amounting to the same as a car payment a month, etc., etc. not to mention that the stock market has grown a staggering 1000 points in 7 years.....yep everything is great isn't it?
If a bank is missing a million dollars suddenly but no one knows who took it does that mean no crime was committed?
If a woman is raped but has no witnesses and cannot win a prosecution does that mean she was never raped?
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:25 pmReply to #5 and 6
You guys are right on the spelling of "Alzheimers". I was also wrong about McCain's age and thank you for pointing those errors out. My point was the lack of media scrutiny of all of the misstatements he's made and the apparent reason for them. The media seems to be obsessed with the Rev. Wright debacle and it is primarily a media driven farce. First of all that made up media driven story has nothing to do with where Obama stands on any issue or what kind of President he'd make.
Notice how the media immediate backed off the lie that Hillary Clinton told about landing under sniper fire in Bosina. That goes directly to her lack of creditability, because he told a bald face lie. The media hasn't obessed with the comments that Paster Haggey made about Catholics, calling it a "whore religion", or some of the other stupid things he's said about Katrina victims. My basic point is the media has focused on destroying Sen. Obama's campaign with guilt by association and failed to adequate cover some of the lies and crocked friends of Hillary and Bill. They seem to have forgotten about the chinese fund raiser who was convicted in California for illegal fund raising.
They also forgot about all of the scandals the Clinton administration went through during his two terms. I recall the chinese tempel illegal fund raising scandal, and the Lincoln bedroom fund raising scandal well. I worked for the Clinton campaign from the very beginning before he was nationally known. And I voted for him twice and would have again if he had been able to run. I also thought the impeachment was political theater which was used by Republicans as a way to get even for losing the Presidency twice. So I'm not pointing out the negative things about them as a detractor. I supported Sen. Clinton at first until I saw that she was not trust worthy and would do or say anything to get elected.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:38 pmWayne A. Schneider Says:
Suggestion TP,
Why not just create a whole separate page (Like Wonk Room and Attackerman) dedicated to just John McCain posts? Save this page for the rest of the world news.
I agree. I don't spend a lot of time here any longer because I am sick and tired of McCain, Feith and Cheney posts. If TP wants to ignore the Presidential campaign on the Democratic side, so be it. But, I would rather spend time on sites who don't stick their head in the sand because they support a certain candidate. The Daily Kos and Huffington Post both lean towards Obama, but they don't ignore him and post strictly Hillary posts.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:46 pmAhhh A new version.... McYoda speak.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:47 pm"Me long time Iraq war think yes?
backup Says:
Bilbo.
Of course Congress doesn’t have “significant evidence”.
If congress doesn’t have significant evidence, then I assume you don’t have significant evidence (because you could just give it to them and wrap this whole thing up).
Typical of a troll to ignore most of a post and cherry-pick what it wants. It ignores the reasons I gave for there being no "significant evidence". There is no way to get this evidence since Bush and the courts are stonewalling on subpoenas and because Bush declares everything they have done since day 1 is covered by EP (including the death of Patrick Tillman).
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:48 pmFred. It's a little different. Bush took us to war under the assumption that Saddam had WMD. Most believed that he did at the time. But, Saddam was bluffing.
The question becomes, did Bush know before that Saddam didn't have them. If he didn't know, it wasn't a crime. It was a mistake, due to faulty intelligence.
Progressives want to open up the records, even if there is no evidence of criminality, it would probably be politically embarrassing.
Conservatives (or Bush supporters) can assert that opening up the records could be detrimental to our security or to the effort in Iraq. They also see the potential for political embarrasment and distraction, they would rather avoid.
It boils down to this: If the Democrats in Congress were confident enough of the evidence being there (and it being more significant than just politically embarrasing) they would get the support to get it done. They would feel obligated to right the wrong. They're not that confident. And a partisan, circumstantial attack could also be embarrassing.
I believe Democrats are content to let the assumption of guilt to persist (take a look at Bush's approval ratings and negatives) without jeopardizing it with an impeachment.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:57 pmBilbo,
Do not talk to the troll. It is only a Rovian operative with the Global Climate change denier mentality now focused on the treason of the Whitehouse from the Commander dinkledoofus on down. Here is a good example of the denier mentality.
backup (of bush Traitors Inc) Says:
"A recession is two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth. Even though the economy has been experiencing very slow growth, we have yet to have even one quarter of negative GDP growth."
See it does not matter what the rest of the world, the overwhelming vast majority of economists and everyone else in the know, even the fed says we are in a recession. The Traitors have a "Metric" and they have fudged everything in the the economy to not let that metric fall, Ergo, No recession. Forget about the foreclosures, the credit crises, and the fall of the dollar, and the loss of American manufacturing, and on and on. The metric has not fallen. It reminds me of Caddyshack, when at the end the whole golf course is blowing up, and Brian-Doyle Murray is sitting with his face right up to the teetering gold ball on the side of the cup, and it happens to fall into the cup when a HUGE explosion happens. Unfortunately, the bushit trators Inc, will not "Win" when the metric (ball falling in the cup) happens. WE all will lose.
Also reminds me of Animal House and Kevin Bacon trying to calm the rioters at the parade, "ALL IS WELL, ALL IS WELL"
"Death to the king" May his protoplasm rot for eternity, or be sent to the sun to never allow humanity to experience its dna again. YEs that includes all the rest of "them."
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:00 pmThinking about it, I think the whole bush-cabal should be sent to a prison constructed on Yucca Mountain.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:03 pmNeil YOung could sing a song for them.
Oh to live on Yucca Mountain
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:04 pmWith the criminals and the colored baloons.
Backup: you are assuming there is a real difference between the politicians in Congress. I personally believe that they are mostly co-opted by their affiliations with big business and lobbies. Why would Pelosi say impeachment is off the table, when basically, Democrats voted for Congressmen they thought would do that? She never really gave a reason, to my knowledge, incomplete as it may be.
I do think that the major reason the US went to war was for oil, but there were other personal reasons for Bush II, and neocon reasons. The problem is, they did such a stupid job of managing the war, the oil issue was overtaken by the continuing need to justify our presence, and most of the world, including much of America (I believe unrightly so) would not support "war for Oil". I was totally against the war from June 2002 when I realized what was going to happen. Having served in VIetNam, and study a bit of insurgent warfare, any reason but for oil was ridiculous. I don't intend to write a book here about why the war was stupid, but suffice it to say that if it were for oil, I could support the premise for going in, but I could never support the stupid way it was planned and managed. And, as I felt during my stays in VietNam, I wish my military leadership had lived up to their obligations then, as I wish they had lived up their obligations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Any second lieutenant of infantry would hav known that a blocking force was needed at the Afghan border if we were going to capture OSL. So, in my humble opinion, Gen Tommy Franks earned his Medal of Freedom either because he was following orders because Bush needed a demon, or he was dumber than a second lieutenant. Either way, Bush showed his colors.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:11 pmHigh Plains. Thanks for serving in Vietnam. I respect you're opinion about the mismanagement.
In retrospect, I think the invasion into Iraq was a mistake. (I just don't believe Bush new there were no WMD before hand). I also believe that oil could have been one of the many reasons we went.
I also believe that Afghanistan should be and should have been the focus. I support what I believe is a combination of McCain's securing Iraq and Obama's refocus on Afghanistan (I know the problem is more troops and money).
In hindsight (for me) the invasion into Iraq was a mistake (we had more time to do it peacefully).
And the war was mismanaged (especially under Rumsfeld).
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:23 pmCap'n, I understand what you're saying. My criticism wasn't based on some misunderstanding of your point. It was rather based on a pretty solid understanding of it.
The conclusions you draw and present as evidence that the president did not lie us into a war are very weak.
You assume that if Bush did in fact lie to get us into war a) Democrats in Congress would have evidence of those lies, b) that evidence would be compelling enough to assure conviction and c) Democrats would find it politically expedient to impeach.
This "logic" ignores the likelihood that a) the most secretive White House in history would work very very hard at both skating to the edge of falsehood (the phrase plausible deniability comes to mind) and keeping the lid on any evidence (millions of missing emails come to mind), b) the razor-thin margin in the Senate would make conviction very difficult to achieve, and c) Democrats might feel that the good of the party comes before the good of the country (a lesson learned at the feet of Newt, Trent, and Dubya) and their electoral prospects are better served by keeping the most upopular president in history around at least through the election, in order to hang him around the neck of McSame.
In short, Cap'n your argument is spurious, unsophisticated and weak.
I don't think you're an idiot -- your use of language says you have some education -- I just think you're here to amuse yourself at our expense and you don't really care whether you make sense or not.
Otherwise, I can't understand how someone who writs reasonably well can argue so consistently poorly.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:45 pmBackedup mumbled:
"Fred. It’s a little different. Bush took us to war under the assumption that Saddam had WMD. Most believed that he did at the time. But, Saddam was bluffing.
The question becomes, did Bush know before that Saddam didn’t have them. If he didn’t know, it wasn’t a crime. It was a mistake, due to faulty intelligence."
Even this is a a bullshit piece of spin. This traitorous cabal in the Whitehouse has been spinning the meme of the WMD MANY, MANY years after its PROOF that there was none. So, the bullshit line "due to faulty intelligence" could NEVER have happened as they were in control of ALL of the intelligence, that which DISPROVED them, that which they funneled to CONGRESS, and that which they narrowly allowed to be offered to the public through their Murdoch controlled and GE controlled FREIGHTWING media. So, do not let this lying sack of shit tell you anything different. They lied, they KNEW THEY LIED, THERE IS AMPLE evidence all over the U.S. England, Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan that they lied, They are CrRIMINALS and even a second year law student could prove their guilt. They need to be arrested, tried and HUNG for treason. Plain and simple. No spinning, or bullshit about "evidence" is going to take our eye from that prize of seeing george and dick swing from the gallows.
"See george swing." A new children's book, to replace My Pet Goat," for the kids in Florida to read.
We could care less about pardons or not, The Hague don't listen to no pardons dumbfu(k. Your boys are going down, and going down HARD. Get ready to be SHOCKED AND AWED by the might and power of reality. You have danced around it for 7 years now, time to pay the piper.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:49 pmbackup, you are doomed. You already know that as you are probably posting from Dubai as I type.
And BTW, dinkledoofus cannot pardon treason.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:54 pmralph. I've got to go to work. But, you make a good argument. Again, I won't convince you but, I really believe what I believe. Thanks for a good exchange.
May 3rd, 2008 at 3:07 pmExcuse me?!
May 3rd, 2008 at 3:51 pmI knew, Hans Blix knew, Germany knew, France knew. Hell everyone knew that gave a damn. You are not here because you believe that crap, you are here just as Ralph has pointed out....to rub our noses in your excrement. I fingered you a long time ago and let Ralph and some others convince me that you were here to discuss.....bullshit.
Backup:
Rice and Powell both new months prior to 9/11 that Saddam was not a threat. Check out the link below for complete information.
Either Bush was kept out of the loop (unlikely, yet if true, a very dangerous situation considering that he IS the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, and as he likes to remind us, it is his Constitutional duty to protect us from attack) or he ignored that with which he disagreed (very likely).
There is also evidence that within days of 9/11, the administration set its sights on Iraq (you'll recall Rummy's declaration that Iraq had more targets).
Link.
Knock yourself out.
May 3rd, 2008 at 4:03 pmIt doesn't really matter what Bushco thought. Intentionally, or not, they invaded a country that didn't threaten us. That, IMO, is the worst thing a government can do. Regardless of intent. The oft used phrase "war crime" is the only one which applies.
Furthermore, concealing details from our, duly elected, legislative branch is, at best, dishonorable. At worst? It's treasonous.
May 3rd, 2008 at 4:22 pmFred, in retrospect, you were right about the Cap'n. I was wrong. My instincts to engage in dialogue with those who seem reasonable were exploited by a troll who for some reason seems to get off on posting nonsense disguised as debate.
I'll give the Cap'n this much; he was far more clever about his agenda than most of the trolls here.
May 3rd, 2008 at 4:32 pmCrap. S/B "knew."
May 3rd, 2008 at 4:35 pmMcIIIrd trips over his tongue, again, this time with sharpened cleats.
Geebutz.
May 3rd, 2008 at 5:02 pmNever mind that McCain is dishonest and incompetent in matters of crucial importance, such as our national security. Never mind that McCain has no idea why over 100,000 American troops are fighting in Iraq. Never mind his dangerous saber-rattling with Iran. Never mind that he doesn't know the difference between Sunnis and Shiites, or seems bent on conflating them and obscuring them.
What I want to talk about is Jeremiah Wright, bitter-gate, and whether or not Barack Obama likes to drink orange juice. Because that's what we "real Americans" like me care about.
May 4th, 2008 at 12:14 am#76: Fred. It’s a little different. Bush took us to war under the assumption that Saddam had WMD. Most believed that he did at the time. But, Saddam was bluffing.
Bluffing? You mean when he was repeatedly denying that he had WMD's? This is a right-wing yarn that has gained momentum over the past several years, retroactively, to suggest that Saddam Hussein was trying to mislead the world community into thinking he had WMD's. The trouble with this story? There's absolutely no evidence to support it. What we do have, however, is an extensive history of Saddam Hussein repeatedly denying that he had WMD's. How are you construing that as a "bluff"?
And for the purposes of argument, let's take as fact your assertion that "most" believed Saddam Hussein had WMD's before the invasion. Whose fault is that? The Bush administration that cherry-picked the intelligence to bolster their case for war? Or the media that uncritically reported government propaganda as fact?
May 4th, 2008 at 12:28 amIn a press conference earlier today, John McCain's Talk insisted that it was straight, and the incident in the restroom was merely a misunderstanding due to its wide stance.
May 4th, 2008 at 4:37 amNow, that's straight talk...McCain style!
May 4th, 2008 at 10:25 am