Comments for McCain: "Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted?" »
Posted By Neophile 1 year, 2 months ago in NewsJohn McCain being interviewed by Mother Jones magazine in the Nov/Dec 1998 issue: "Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that's depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before. And where there is a parallel with Vietnam is: What's plan B? What do we do next? We sent our troops into Vietnam to protect the bases. Lyndon Johnson said, Only to protect the bases. Next thing you know.... Well, we've declared to the terrorists that we're going to strike them wherever they live. That's fine. But what's next? That's where there might be some comparison."
Read Full Story at talkingpointsmemo.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 102
-
87%
Aidenag1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I hope the TV news picks up on this, if they can pull stuff from decades ago on Obama, they sure as hell should be covering this story on every channel. Especially since McCain is campaigning on national security and foreign policy experience as his sole claim to why he should be in the white house.
Reply -
88%
tomboy5011 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The skeletons in McCain's closet are numerous and devastating. I'm sure this is only the tip of the iceberg.
Reply
All Obama really has to do right now is just keep going like he is going. Even Rove is calling the Election Map for Obama now: http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081005/pl_polit... hahahah
Let McCain and his campaign play around in the gutter and open the doors wide...the media will fill in the blanks over the next 30 days.
And with Palin's snide little comments during her Carson speech yesterday about the media 'spinning her words' (or whatever she said referring to the Albright Starbucks cup-quote), she's just firing up teams of bloggers and MSM investigators to go dredge up and put on display some pretty devastating material on mccain that we all know is out there.
It's not a glass ceiling for you and your running mate, Ms. Palin. It's a glass house. -
HomerJS49Comment removed: Abusive
-
89%
smithichie1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CONS count on their fellows having short term memories, that's why they can get away with blaming Clinton for his lack of action against terrorists in the 90's while conveniently forgetting how Reps faught him every step of the way and tied his hands at every opportunity. When the missile attack that almost took out Bin Laden failed, Reps didn't cry that it wasn't enough, they cried it was too much. A distraction from the 'important' business at hand, a BJ in the Oval Office.
Reply -
mntnman444Comment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned1 Reply
-
86%
not2needy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have said it before and i will say it again. IF Mc is elected, the people who voted for him will get exactly what's coming to them. Sadly, the people who didn't vote for him will get the same treatment, but at least we will have the knowledge that we didn't help put him in office.
Reply-
80%
epiphannyy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I didn't vote for Bush even once, but my quality of life has suffered greatly because of his Presidency. And while I have the knowledge that I didn't help put him there, it doesn't make up for the fact that he's there and has cost the lives of several of my loved ones in his personal war for oil and revenge. Knowing I didn't put them there is nowhere near enough to compensate for the damage he has done just to my personal circle of life, and I am just one person out of the several hundred million in the US.
Reply
I get what you're saying, but we're past the point in this country of simply holding onto the higher moral ground. This election HAS to change the course we're on, or I seriously fear we're going to stray so far from the right course that we'll likely never find our way back again. It may already be too late, to be honest. But I'm not willing to settle for simply knowing I wasn't a part of the destruction. That's where I was during the Bush elections. This one, for me, is all or nothing because I seriously believe that if we get four more years of the same that the days of America, land of the free, etc, will be lost forever. The court appointments coming up this next term are what make it so. Balance and reason MUST be maintained in the court or we'll all be living under the Rovian version of America long past the time every Bush, Cheney, Rove, and McCain have vanished.-
71%
Jaydee401 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There can be no moral high ground without justice and retribution, in other words the shrub and his gang of thugs in prison or hung plus all the money they made confiscated and put back into repairing what they distorted, at home and abroad. America has lost any creditability they had world wide, only a accountability and remorse will win it back. It's time the American people accept their responsibility it bringing down their corrupt government and I don't mean at the polls as that is only a farce, neither side of this election will bring those responsible to justice so who cares who wins!!
Reply-
22%
reidgator1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
(1) What good is credibility from our "allies" if they are too cowardly or incompetent to accomplish anything? The UN is complete joke. A waste of time and USA money!
Reply
The only groups we need credibility with are our "enemies" - those that would do us harm. I would prefer they RESPECT us, but, if not, then, they should FEAR us. Thanks to Reagan and Clinton, the USA had little credibility from our enemies. Remember the attacks against our personnel (Lebanon in 1983, WTC in 1993, US embassies in Africa (1998?), USS Cole in 2000. How many died because we had no credibility.
At least Bush restord that credibility.
(2) Why should the US accept any responsibility for its actions. In recent years, what country has been forced to accept responsibility for its actions? (Except Iraq in 1991) Look aroudn the world, There is so much corruption, oppression, genocide, greed, yada, yada. This whole world is a joke. To those that criticize the USA, I ask, "Just what the F are YOU doing to help solve these problems?"
Your post suggests that all of the wortld's problem can be solved if America atones itself. Just what drugs are you taking???-
56%
Jaydee401 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What other first world country makes up lies to invade and steal third world and second world countries? The US is in a league if it's own when it comes to corruption and hypocrisy, the US has been making up lies to justify it's actions since the American Revolution and the American public has been eating it up. When will the American public wake UP? What USA money are you talking about as far as the UN goes, they have been behind in their dues and commitments for decades and what little "aid" they do give is it military weapons that just end up killing more civilians, stop falling for BS propaganda and look into the reality. You can talk about so called attacks on the US all you want but the simple truth is if the US kept it's nose out of other counties affairs they would not get it bloodied so often, you bring it on yourself.
Reply -
73%
wtagg1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How exactly has Bush restored credibility as far a foreign policy goes? Do we lead in that area? If our enemies think our military, foreign policy, and world presence should command respect, why are we scurrying around like idiots whenever someone brings a q-tip or water bottle on an airplane Our leaders have no ability to look forward past the minute they are living in.
Reply
Our problem is we no longer lead. You are suggesting we act as everyone else, thus the conclusion that you do not want us to lead. Will the world's problems be solved by the US changing its current foreign policy? Probably not, but we would surely not be piling on or wasting huge amounts of our tax dollars on efforts that bring back nothing to this country.
I ask you the question of why is the US in the business of trying to solved the world's problems? I am not advocating a isolationist point of view, but our current effort outside this country has been horrible. How anyone can say that Rice or even Powell did a good job (or even a marginally acceptable one) is incredible.-
57%
Jaydee401 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree 100%, US foreign policy has run the country for years putting the Average American citizen at a disadvantage for decades. The only reason for this is so rich companies can make profits and fill their pockets. Look at the lack of funding for infrastructure that led to the lose of life in the US over the years. Many communities need federal money but if it was a choice between weapons or better schools, hospitals and food we all know where the money will go. Another thing is the wealth that the US once had is gone but the government will not admit it to the people, instead they lie in the hopes of pinning it on the next administration. The truth is the government has been printing to much money for years to pay for military spending instead of for the good of its people.
Reply -
13%
reidgator1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
wtagg,
Reply
Your post is one of the most intelligent ones I have read in a while! You ask some good questions! Will do my best to answer:
PART 1
(1) "How exactly has Bush restored credibility as far a foreign policy goes?"
He hasn't. And I do not want him to. When I look at the rest of the "western world", I really do not care about their respect for us. They do not have mine, that's for sure. "In an insane world, the sane man will appear insane!"
(2) "why are we scurrying around like idiots whenever someone brings a q-tip or water bottle on an airplane?"
Good point. But, that is OUR fault. We place WAY, WAY TOO MUCH blame on the office of president. The people will never forgive Bush if another hijacking occurs.
A few points to bolster my position:
a) Bush has been blamed by many, especially the liberal environmentalists, for the rejection of the Kyoto Treaty. The problem is this: the US SENATE approves treaties. And the US SENATE rejected the Kyoto treaty 98-0!
That's right. Every senator that voted (R or D) rejected the treaty. So, why does Bush get blamed for it?
b) The current mortgage crisis: this is a world-wide problem. Do we blame Bush for the struggles in Germany and Belgium? And the root cause of this problem dates back into the Clinton administration. (and the Republican Congress)
c) Even Jack Krugman (columnist for the NYT) admits that the recession Bush inherited in 2001 was not his fault. Then, along came 9/11 and the obvious economic impact, and we want to blame Bush. Manufacturing jobs have been going overseas for 20 years. Perot warned us in 1992. So, why do we blame Bush?
(3) "Our current effort outside this country has been horrible."
The results have been less than desired, but, why have our efforts been horrible? 4000 dead? We lost more than that in one day EACH on Normandy, Okinawa, and Iwo Jima. Were those efforts "horrible"?
Iraqis can now vote. Schools & hospitals are being built. Yes, Iraq has suffered much. But, ask them, would they rather go back to the way things were in 2002?-
86%
Jaydee401 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
1 Thats the American way right? The US economy screwed and the US military combat ineffective but who needs friend or allies? New flash sparky the US needs us more than we need you, look at what you import vrs what you export.
Reply
2 Many people blame the shrub for 9/11 and there is much support there for that, many documents point right to the intelligence community and white house for having full knowledge prior to 9/11. All bush has done is to lie and cover up so why the impression he has done anything? America is weaker at home than anytime in it's history, if someone wanted to spread terror in US cities it would be happening. but clearly that is not the case.
As to the mortgage "crisis" it is not the world wide problem you put forward, it only happened in countries that don't have regulations letting lenders make up their own rules up in sub prime mortgages.
Why blame the shrub for jobs going overseas? How about it's the governments job to keep the country strong financially and competitive in the world market. Since the Underachieving shrub took office the US dollar has lost almost fifty percent of it's worth, that means a company once worth 600 million US is now only worth 300 US while most companies from other counties that had the opposite happen, ones that were once worth 300 million are now worth 600 million US. The average lifestyle around the world has soared all over the world but within the US as a result of this. People in countries all over the world now have disposable income like never before and are traveling and spending while Americans are doing without in greater numbers all thanks to the global shift in wealth since the shrub took office.
3 Clearly you have not lost a child as one of those 4000, if you had you would not have made such callous remarks and don't dare to compare Normandy or Okinawa with the Crimes of Iraq or Afghanistan,-
0%
reidgator1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
(1) The fact that we import more than export is evidence that YOU need us more than we need you. YOUR lousy economies would not survive without our purchases. We proved during WW2 to have the most powerful manufacturing base in the world. Do we still have that? Nah, but, we can regain it. And the liberals deserve most of the blame for us losing it.
Reply
(2) You’re a liar. No evidence that Bush & Co has “full knowledge” of the attacks. They were warned by Clinton’s administration that something was pending, that the threat was real, but, details of what, where, and when were nonexistent! Just what do you suggest Bush should have done to prevent the attacks?
Technically, you are correct. The world-wide problem involves economies in general. The mortgage crisis is limited to “western countries”. BTW – if we need you, then, why does our economic slump affect YOURS?
Regarding lax regulations, the Republicans (and McCain) expressed concern about Fannie Mae, etc and attempted to tighten the rules. Democrats said NO!
You wrote: “How about it's the governments job to keep the country strong financially and competitive in the world market”
Do not disagree, but, I repose the question, “Why blame Bush?”
a) Jobs have been going overseas for 20 years. Yet you only want to blame Bush. You have a myopic view of the situation.
b) Bush is not THE government. What about Congress that passes laws and places burdens on American companies making it difficult to compete in a global market? What about local laws and regulations? My company closed a plant, laying off 1400 people (including me) because it could not compete in global economy. Environmental regs were ridiculous. Examples: Our water discharge had to meet standards that were so high, that water coming out of the ground could not meet. We were effectively cleaning up the water. The standards for particulates in the air inside the plant were as tight for our equipment as those Japan required for their employees! Plant existed for 40 years, no evidence of health problems from operations, but, we were forced to spend $30,000,000 to improve conditions. That is why we could not compete with Japan and Korea.
c) yes – there has been a shift in global wealth. However, it began BEFORE bush too office.
Again, why do you blame Bush for all of this? BECAUSE YOU WANT TO! It is easier to blame one person at the top rather than blame everyone underneath. It was easier to blame Hitler than hold all of Germany responsible for WW2 and the Holocaust!
(3) To compare Iraq with Normandy and Iwo Jima is not callous. It is objective!
You ignore the 3000 families who lost loved ones on 9/11.
Since March of 2003, the city of Detroit has had more than 4000 murders.
Each year, we lose 40,000 in car accidents. That is simply stating a fact and keeping things in perspective.
For you to ignore those other deaths makes YOU callous.-
75%
Jaydee401 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wow Good attempt at redirecting blame, fifty percent of US wealth gone because of one administrations actions and you don't think the leader is to blame? No other country has had their currency fall by the same margin as the US, on the contrary the rest of the world has stead consistent while the US lost, why could that be? In your attempt to rewrite current events you hide the facts and discredit the truth but not everyone falls for it, I don't and others don't as well.
Reply
My economics are fine sparky, with the rest of the world having a raise in their standard of living why not sell to them and make more money than to the US? Yes they are farther to ship to but their currency keeps it's value unlike the Greenback. Everything we sell is used and needed on the world market, not just the US, remember that.
Don't seem to remember any problem with sub prime mortgages here but our banking system is regulated thankfully so that could be why.
How did I ignore the 3000 plus dead from 9/11 which the government knew full well about prior to 9/11? Or the over 4000 dead in the middle east in a conflict that is based on lies, to die for a cause is one thing but to die for lies and deceit is a tragedy, nothing more, nothing less. Your comparison is a insult to everything history has taught us, you seem to be trying to say that the Iraqi's are better off now to be in the most violent part of the world unable to defend themselves at a time when they need it most. That is the US doings and nobody else's.
Nice story about environmental laws taking jobs away but lets look at facts, last year when Chinese factories were recalling toys with lead paint nobody said they needed jobs, lets overlook this did they? Fact is as first world countries we need to lead the world at cleaning up our environment and that comes with a price, it US companies want to take their manufacturing of shore then tax their products when the come into the country so it's not an option. Your going to have to pay more but at least the jobs would be there for you and your kids.
-
-
-
-
-
0%
reidgator1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wtagg,
Reply
Your post is one of the most intelligent ones I have read in a while!
You ask some good questions! Will do my best to answer:
(continued) PART 2
(4) "Our problem is we no longer lead. You are suggesting we act as everyone else" plus your other questions & points.
Not really. I was essentially asking why was the poster holding the USA to a standard that no other country was being held to.
I want the US to do what is best for the US. But, to your point, we can not be isolationist. Doing what is best for us does not mean abandoning the rest of the world. As the wealthiest nation on earth, we do have a moral responsibility to help those in need. Are you suggesting that we should have stayed out of Europe in 1944?
NOTE - in Dec 1941, the prevailing opinion in the USA was to defeat Japan first, leave Europe to suffer/fight its own war with Hitler. After Japan is defeated, then, we can address Hitler. However, Hitler forced our hand when Germany declared war against the US.
We do need to lead, but, what if the rest of the world does not wish to follow?
Some things we should still do even if the rest of the world does not follow. However, some things would be stupid if attempted without the support and agreement of the rest of the world. Example: the Kyoto treaty. It would allow China and India to continue putting tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Industries would just move their operations to those countries. In other words, our economy would suffer for no benefit!
Being a leader means being willing to be unpopular.
Remember, the Brits voted Churchill out of office in 1944 (over concerns about their economy), only to vote him back in the next election. So the problem of a fickle citizenry is not limited to the USA!
I am OK with the US being unpopular, especially in a world that does not care about genocide. BTW - are you aware that Muslims in Kosovo supported our invasion of Iraq? They were proud that we led there! And you can not deny that we are leading, even if the rest of the world is too cowardly and apathetic to follow.
Should we try to solve the world's problems? Why not at least try? There is a limit to what we can do. And I will admit that Iraq may have been too big of a problem for us to tackle. Or, maybe if the liberals showed some character and morals and backed the efforts, at least the idea of helping Iraq, then, there would have been less resistance on the part of Bush and Rumsfeld to make some necessary changes to the war strategy.
Tell me - why is Afghanistan any more a "good war" than Iraq?
BTW - it is interesting that Obbie supports the efforts in Afghanistan, which we are losing (and per a Brit commander, can not win), while the efforts in Iraq (denounced by Obbie) are succeeding.-
Neutral
wtagg1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"As the wealthiest nation on earth, we do have a moral responsibility to help those in need." = Socialism. If we are going to pursue a socialist path, which I am completely against, we should do it at home. We have more of a *moral* duty here than outside our borders. This conflicts with your I don't care what others think stance.
Reply
You see Kyoto as a glass lacking opportunity. I see it full of opportunity. Green business and alternative energy are the opportunities of leadership and financial gain. Lead in these areas and we'll be exporting energy and energy technology and have others beholden to us vs. the other way around. It is funny that you don't care what others think, but you use others as examples. I think you need to become consistent. Either care or don't.
Are you aware that republicans did not support our efforts in Kosovo? Ironically, Clinton did not lose one service man or woman to hostile action in that entire effort. Maybe the admin should have taken him on as a military adviser. On the other hand, the Somalia effort was terrible and can be blamed on Clinton. On the bright side, he was smart enough to see a situation that was untenable and never ending. He got out.
"Should we try to solve the world's problems?" = elitism. Who are we to dictate solutions. Considering our record in this area, the only rationale for a country to accept help would be for the money and materials. I'm not sure you want me to point out our successes in this area. It isn't pretty.
9/11 originated in Afghanistan. That effort was in direct response to the event and needs to be concluded. Iraq was something the admin wanted. There has not been a valid rationale for us to invade. DR, DC, and GB wanted Iraq on 9/12. They were warned by Powell that that would be ill-advised. They decided to wait until enough *evidence* could be provided. The quality of that evidence cast suspicions upon the timing and motive for the invasion.
-
-
-
-
-
50%
not2needy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
epiphannyy, I didn't say we would find comfort in knowing that we didn't help put him there, just that we would know we didn't help put him there.
Reply
I agree with everything you say, and i live in anticipation and fear of Nov 4th. Hoping for the best and dreading the worst. It's like a cancer eating away at the whole nation.-
Neutral
epiphannyy1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
n2n,
Reply
I understand what you were saying, and I'm not arguing. I just don't want to accept even the idea of resignation. This one is too important to even entertain the thought of defeat in my mind. McCain/Palin is even more ominous, in my opinion, than Bush/Cheney was for several reasons. First, the fact that they both want a continuation of the same, but mostly because if elected, Palin will almost definitely ascend to the presidency by default and THAT is just frightening. The woman is so unqualified that they are shielding her from every press venue for fear of what she might say. Here we are, in an election for the people who will run the country for a minimum of four years, and instead of actually submitting to any real interview, they just play and replay soundbites and hope the American public will accept it.
Its pretty sad when the rigors of the interview process for a fast food job exceed the the rigors of the interview process for leader of the free world. What are we thinking??
-
-
-
12%
reidgator1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And if Obbie is elected, "the people who voted for him will get exactly what's coming to them. Sadly, the people who didn't vote for him, .....
Reply
Get the picture???
I do not like either one of these clowns, so I will have to pick the leser of two evils.
The real question is: which one is worse?
The evidnce is clear that Obbie is the worse option.
You can not trust him at all. He ran in the primary as a "liberal", then, as soon as the media coronated him with the Democratic nomination, he sprinted to the center.
He then preaches that he will "fix Washintgton politics"!
Excuse me, what hypocrisy. He rides the train as far it will take him, and then he will jump off.
This is the philosophy of many Muslim extremist groups. They openly state that they will ride the train of demcoracy as far as it will take them, then, when they gain power, they will jump off that train and impose Sharia law.
Now, I'm not naive. Obbie is not a true Muslim (not that I can tell) and his ability to impose his agenda (whatever it is) will be much less than that of a Muslim theocracy, but, I fear that Obbie will try to seriously alter the landscape is ways that will harm America.
His long time association with Rev. Wright, and some of the comments his wife has made over the years should cause each of us to be very careful!
-
-
89%
miklkit1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
More on the real john.
Reply
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/05/18/the-real-john-...-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
doggammitComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
BronxBomberComment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
90%
rp11281 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
While Gov. Palin is questioning the asociation of Sen Obama,she should ask her running mate about his association with Charles Keating. He of the failed savings and loan scandal. Ask Sen. McCain why he tried to intefere with the investgation of Mr. Keating? By the way, that was another govt. bailout that Sen. McCain was involved with,Mr. straight talk is silent about this event. Maybe Gov.Palin will suspend her campaign and take care of those subpoenas she and her husband have waiting in Alaska.
Reply -
84%
Searchbeam1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
McPain's history is full of fake fables and tall tales, but with very little to show for his 26 years in Washington, DC.
Reply
I am curious to know what exactly happened at his meeting with Dumbya and Shotgun Dickie: Going in, he was dead set against any form of torture. When he came out, his face was ashen, and he said that he supports the current investigation techniques at Gitmo! What an about face from a guy who spent 5 1/2 years in Vietnamese torture chambers.
If I remember correctly, around the same time, there was this saga of Beltway Madam going around, and the list of her "clientele" was in the hands of a chosen few.
One must wonder if there was any association between these two stories on parallel tracks.
Maybe someday we will know!
No matter which way this one shakes out, one thing is very visible: McPain's "chicken dance" around Sarah! Real hot stuff, if you know what I mean! LOL!-
-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
-
-
donald51Comment removed: Hard Banned
-
25%
crymeariver1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Finally, someone who makes some sense. I have yet to see a politician who doesn't put his or her party first. Palin is the first one to actually take an office in order to bring about change for the people who put her there.I could never understand our blind devotion to a given party. The hateful comments I see in the chat rooms of late have opened my eyes to the fact that the new age of DEMS are a hateful whinning sort. If we were all smart, we would have asked Governor Huckabee to become an independant and vote for him. At least his fair tax program would have been good for all of us.
Reply-
-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
Neutral
fresnodanny1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You've got the nerve to call Dems "whiners"???? Whaaa??? This nation never saw such schoolhouse antics from the Republican senate and congress if they thought one of their pet bills wasn't going to go their way. They filibustered at unprecedented levels, whine and cry is all they did. And this... after accusing the Dems of overusing and abusing the filibuster. You depended on the Dems to lay down, roll over and accept their fate over and over again, because they did - to my chagrin. Now that they're just not gonna take it any more, you call it whining. Beyond despicable. Not only do you need to be sent to the principal's office, you need to be expelled! Which, if things go as Rove himself has predicted... you will.
Reply
-
-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
sortofcute01Comment removed: Hard Banned12 Replies
-
11%
beavith11 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
you must be having feverish visions.
Reply
there is no comparison to Hitler, or if you insist there is one, i could make the same argument about O getting swept into power by a groundswell of discontent, just like Hitler.
your impressive intellect is only surpassed by that big jug of kool aid you've been drinking out of.
i happened to see a joke.
did you hear that O had 60,000 people at his rally in Denver? do you know why McCain only had 20,000? the other 100,000 were working. -
mackiemesserComment removed: Retracted by user
-
10%
lloydm651 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama said in one of his books he would remain American, until things turned sour He then will stand with the Muslims.Does this give you confidence of how hard he will he will work to protect us from these radical nut cases.Maybe he feel he would be a much greater muckedy de muck under Sharia Law.You just don't know about a radical leftist.I do know we can't afford to find out.
Reply-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
sailrComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
100%
jesh1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
GO TO THE ORIGINAL ARTICLE NOT JUST THE SHORT SNIPPET also notice he starts with "you might say" .... he is not stating fact he is throwing around theory's and it also shows he is not the war monger they make him out to be http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/1998/11/ve...
Reply-
100%
Ratskii1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks for posting the complete article jesh. I don't see how prefacing his remark with the words, "you might say," really changes the meaning though. in 1998 many conservatives were still thinking of Bin Laden as one of the "freedom fighters" against the soviets in Afghanistan. That would, I think provide more context for McCain's remark.
Reply
Another quote I found interesting was from the question on accepting campaign contributions:
MJ: "Bill Gates has given you money, and so has Rupert Murdoch. Both have business before your committee. This is exactly the thing that most people would raise an eyebrow at. Why do you take their money?"
McCain: "It would be nearly impossible for me to raise money without them. But the important point here is that the evil is soft money. There's nothing wrong, in my view, with taking a $1,000 contribution from anybody who wants to give it. And if it comes from Mr. Gates, or if it comes from my next-door neighbor in Phoenix, I think it's OK. I don't think the system was corrupted until soft money exploded, and I won't have anything to do with soft money."
Given all the hay that some conservatives are making of Obama's contributions, I wonder what they make of that?
-
-
0%
Mutainia1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's not just his terrorist ties, it's his 20 years of sitting through something like the Nation of Islam and not bolting out the door from the beginning. It's his throwing his white grandmother "under the bus" even though she "sacrificed mos of her life" for him. It's his taking off Old Glory from his jet, refusing to wear a pen to not offend the enemies of America. It's his lying (uncle didn't liberate Aushwitz), and, his pro-socialist views that will REALLY screw up America.
Reply-
100%
Progressive1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"refusing to wear a pen"?
Reply
When you ditto heads cut and paste from the Corsi book, you still need to spellcheck once in a while. As I post this, the market is down another 500 points, despite McSame's party inserting wooden arrows into the bailout they inflated with additional breaks for the wealthy before they condescended to passing it, and McNasty's campaign wants to pretend he fixed the ecomony so they can go back to smearing Obama? I'd say McPork and his sidekick, Bush-in-a-skirt, belong in a pen.-
Neutral
Mutainia1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's not just his terrorist ties, it's his 20 years of sitting through something like the Nation of Islam and not bolting out the door from the beginning. It's his throwing his white grandmother "under the bus" even though she "sacrificed mos of her life" for him. It's his taking off Old Glory from his jet, refusing to wear a pin to not offend the enemies of America. It's his lying (uncle didn't liberate Aushwitz), and, his pro-socialist views that will REALLY screw up America.
Reply
-
-
-
-
100%
ErinOB1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yep. That was dumb of McCain to question Bin Ladens significance in terrorism.
Reply
But I would not say that makes him a friend of terrorists because he didn't forsee 9/11.
Nor is Obama.
Neither candidate is 'terrorist friendly'.
This is starting to sound like a witch hunt.
Why do people need to make up stuff to support their candidate?
Does their candidate not stand on their own merits enough to support without trying to feed the rumor mill against the other candidate?
Why do people hate the 'game of politics' and the lies, dishonesty and deceit, when they themselves are buying into it, expounding on it, and only hurting themselves in the end, by crippling the morale of America?
I just wish more people would get real. Whatever party/candidate you support.... -
Neutral
hubbabubba51451 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Did any of you catch that it was in 1998? Obama is probably saying this NOW! Wake up people? That was 10 almost 11 years ago! And Obama has been willing to negogiate with these guys ten years later, when they have grown in size and strength, and is getting to be a bigger threat by the second! But, no, that little country Iran that is creating weapons of mass descruction is no threat, that tiny country. That is what Barack HUSSEIN Obama is saying. At least John McCain knows that we can not negogiate with these guys, but to fight to the death with these people! Also you liberal democrats who think that MoveOn.com is a great source, LOOK AT THE NAME, MOVEON! Ten years! He was totally different back then! So was everybody else who is running (or not running) today! So shut up! Forget about it! And no negogiating with anti-American nutjobs and morons!
Reply -
autoprocanadaComment removed: Spammer
-
Neutral
mustang671 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
ARE YOU KIDDING---Obama and his ties to radicals and openly opinionated people is n black community is a very high concern for us all. Do you want a person in office, signing into law, actions that will further suck your dollars out of your pockets and into social programs that will further harm our nation and economy!
Reply
Youth of this country—get a clue, no one will provide you a dollar unless there is something in it for them, and this utopia of everyone having the same income and same benefits, BULL. Hard work gets you ahead. This spew of crap that all of us deserve a house, or a car, or medical insurance--- that is socialism is communistic. Study history—IT DOES NOT WORK!
Lasty, Do You Want Government to tell you how much money you can have—How much of that money you MUST pay to City, State, Federal Programs to keep them going--- THAT IS Social/Communism!!! -
-
-
Neutral
Mutainia1 year, 2 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
IF McCain took Laden lightly, he was kind of right. It's really not Bin Laden we should be afraid of. It's a book, the Quran, that turns people like Bin Laden and 45 British Islamic MEDICAL doctors (who tried to destroy two Scottish airports), into MONsters.
Reply -
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.