Dean asked about McCain's 100 year comment
Monday May 5, 2008
Categories: Politics
And he has no good answer for why he distorted the remark: Seems like politics as usual. Take what the other guy says and distort. Doesn't seem like we're rising above the attack politics does it? DNC lying and distorting...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Subscribe
About Reformed Chicks Blabbing
Read more about the Reformed Chicks: Michele McGinty, Angela Arnold, and Susan Johnson
Recent Posts
Calendar
Resources
- Westminster Theological Seminary
- WTS Bookstore
- Casting Stones
- Christian Blogosphere
- Monergism.com
- reformation21 blog
- evangelical outpost
- Dr Jim West
- Green Baggins
- Between Two Worlds
- once more with feeling
- The Boar's Head Tavern
- Think Christian
- ScrappleFace
- Breitbart.com
- News Busters
- The Brody File
- Hugh Hewitt
- Hot Air
- Fred Thompson Links
- Fishwrap
- Righ Wing News
- RealClearPolitics
- Instapundit.com
- RedState
- MorgueFile
- Tail Rank
- Doorkeeper's Delight
There's no getting around what McCain said. He's willing to commit our troops to a 100-year occupation of Iraq. The caveat of "as long as they're not getting shot at" is ridiculous and everybody knows it. We're getting shot at because we're THERE in THEIR country. American military bases in Saudi Arabia are the reason Al-Quaida got started in the first place and a military presence in Iraq has proven to be just as much of a catalyst for the breeding of terrorists of all stripes.
Why don't you run the YouTube video of McCain admitting that we're in the Middle East because of oil? Let's hear the Republicans atand up and tell the American people that their sons and daughters lost their lives and had their limbs blown off and their brains damaged for Exxon and Shell. THAT'S the bloody truth. A little gaffe on McBush's part that I'm sure won't be repeated, especially not here.
yelladawgNC hit the nail on the head. FOX can spin and spin. Let FOX and GOPers go and serve for oil in Iraq.
No WMDs and now we're serving the Supreme Islamic Council. If Republicans like it, let them go fight.
Aside from the fact that the ones doing the fighting tend to vote Republican, as do their families...
Of course everyone is going to spin and distort everything. This is an election year!
Charles, you may want to update your data on military support of the GOP.
www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/12874.html
"The shift is more than just a few percentage points. In 2002, the last full cycle before Bush launched the Iraqi invasion, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics found that 23% of military members’ contributions went to Democrats. So far in 2007, that number is 40%.
More specifically, the drop-off for Republican support within the Army is striking. Before the war, 71% of Army campaign contributions went to the GOP. This year, that number is down to 51%. So, the GOP’s advantage went from more than 2-to-1 before the war, to near-parity now."
Got to remember, this is about more than agreement or disagreement with foreign policies, or where or how troops are deployed.
The fact is, sooner or later the Military notices if, when talking about 'support our troops', if the group puts money where the mouth is.
They notice the cut in benefits, in medical care, prescription coverage and cost. How they will be treated, how much 'support' they will get if they happen to be injured while in their service, even WHILE active duty, much less as a veteran. They're watching the profiteering, the no-bid contracts that result in poor equipment, bad water, unwashed uniforms, bad food, all the missing billions, literally just.. totally unaccounted for, of taxpayer money that was supposed to go toward these things.
There's more to supporting the troops than supporting a war, or making a speech, or slapping a ribbon, a sticker, or a flag pin in plain sight.
Occupation my tush. He's just talking about bases. We've had troops in Korea for 50 years, but we're not "occupying" them. Having airbases within striking distance of Iran would be a powerful deterrent and a strategic masterstroke.
Also, as a veteran, the primary politics in the military is APOLITICAL. We voted but we almost NEVER talked about politics because we (right or wrong) considered ourselves above it. We were a professional class apart, almost like a monastic order. The motivations of our civilian leaders were irrelevant.
"We know enough if we know we are the king's subjects. If his cause be wrong, our obedience to the king wipes the crime of it out of us" Henry IV, Act 4, Scene 1
Now, start shouting "Seig Heil!" and calling me Ribbentropp.
Then he was offering a red herring, ZZ.
The question and the issue wasn't about bases in peaceful territory. The questions were about about Iraq as a COMBAT ZONE, and how long the troops would be there on combat missions.
Not if we were going to make permanent bases once (whenever that's supposed to happen) the place is stable enough to do so.
"DNC lying and distorting -- that makes a nice ad tagline, don't you think?"
Not nearly as "nice" as "RRR Beliefnet Bloggers lying and distorting".
And nowhere near as accurate.
Spin away my dear. No one believes you anymore.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.