McCain says 10 years in Iraq....

I can't decide who is a better canidate to lose the election, MacCain or Guiliani. This is NUTZO!



Russert Grills McCain on Iraq: Uses Own Words Against Him :



MR. RUSSERT: Under your plan, you're strongly suggesting we're going to be there for the next 10 years at least in order to secure and stabilize that country.

SEN. McCAIN: I am suggesting that we will have--hopefully reach a situation where American troops will not be on the front lines, where--and, by the way, that will not be immediately--where American troops are able to withdraw. We've had troops in South Korea for 60 years, and Americans are, are very satisfied with that situation. The key to it is, is the Iraqi military and police taking over these responsibilities. And that is, I believe, the ultimate way we're going to know whether we can reduce American casualties and they take over the responsibilities for, for governing their own country and militarily attacking and resisting al-Qaeda and other sectarian violence which will be there for a long, long time.

MR. RUSSERT: And we're going to be there for a long time.

SEN. McCAIN: But if it is--if it is--if it is only in a role that is of support and American casualties are minimal, then I think it's probably worth the investment. If the level of casualties stays where it is and we do not have success, then we know that that will be a, a condition that we cannot stand for.

MR. RUSSERT: By when?

SEN. McCAIN: I don't have a date. I think that the important thing is whether we assess as we move along. Everybody talks about--some people talk about April or May--August. Some people talk about September. The fact is that we've got to be showing progress along the way, and we will be--have plenty of time to assess that.

More

Didn't McCain used to be a moderate? WTF happened?

---

No, they're not.

John McCain is bat**** crazy.

---

McCain is to moderate as Bush is to intellectual.

Rolling Stone started the 'vacuum'-- sucking up with their nonsense war hero puff piece designed to derail Bush early in 2000 and the rest of the press just followed along like the three blind mice. It might actually have worked if W. hadn't already hired the big guns to assassinate MiC's character and was not afraid to pull the trigger....the ironic part is..if they'd just stuck to the truth -- if even just sat back and waited -- he would have been out I mean: Gary Hart out--never to be heard from on the national scene out.
But as usual the Bush team thrives on fiction and they overreached..and Mic back like an outbreak of shingles.

McCain has never been, is not, and will never be a moderate. The only people who think McCain is moderate have absolutely no grasp of reading a Congressional voting record.

---

Updated On: 5/14/07 at 05:45 PM

BFB - That's why I find it so hard to align with the Democrats. I just feel their spineless behavior entirely disrespectful. At the very least the Republicans are loyal to their base. It's seems pretty hard to fukc up this next election, but our two lead canidates are making it clear they have no balls.

Hillary is by far the biggest disappointment. Here we have our first potential female president and straight out the gate she is a liar. Not some small lie, A HUGE WAR LIE. She will do the same thing Condi Rice did for black people.... nothing. She may be able to stand by her man, but she can't pass **** and her lies kill people.

I wish she would just come forward, say she voted for big oil and say she has changed. Right now all we get is her "if I knew now" bull****. It is so sad when our elected officials all start talking like George Bush. For pete's sake the first thing everyone learns in history class is "those who fail to learn history or condemned to repeat it." She is failing. Obama is not too far behind.

Updated On: 5/14/07 at 07:56 PM

i strongly suggest that y'all convince dennis the mad elf to run as a 3rd party progressive candidate if he fails to get the nomination.

but it's silly to blame the democratic party for the failings of its candidates. blame the voters. they're the ones who choose who will represent them: the primary voters. they're the ones who decide by their responses in polls who the front runners are. the party itself doesn't just foist some candidate on the people. democrats choose one.

if you don't like the choices who are at the top of the list, blame the donors who fund them. blame the voters who support them. blame the individuals and groups who endorse them. go after their supporters and demand that they reflect your views or find someone who does. fight to get the candidate you favor the kind of recognition that will allow him or her to gain support.

of course, there is the distinct possibility that there's a reason why those candidates who reflect your views most closely don't get more support: the voters (rank and file democrats) are just not that into you.

---

Papa - I think it is very difficult for the average person to find heads or tails with these candidates and their intentions. I don't blame voters. I blame the media.

The media has the strongest influence on people and it is obviously doing a horrible job at real journalism. If the media started doing real investigations and legit reporting, we would get to the meat of the story. Not these stupid buzz words and press junkets.

I think the Republicans are in a worse situation. Not one decent candidate. It’s embarrassing. Where is Jebby?

in this day and age with the amount of information available anyone who remains in thrall to the media has no one but themselves to blame.

the information is there for anyone who wants to find it so
blaming the media is a copout and just one more way to avoid holding people responsible for their own choices and actions.

---

Papa - That is just not fair. Television, Internet, newspapers, magazines books and radio are all controlled by large corporations. Leading up to the Iraq war all were unanimously behind it.

I think it is awful the American public is not able to see through the lies and rhetoric. But I can't balme them. Then again we have people like you spewing the same filth as Fox, New York Time, Washington Post, ABC, NBC and the President of the United States. How can you honestly believe what YOU these Bush lies?

The so-called "liberal" media just doesn't exist. It is like 3 or 4 personalities on blogs and obscure radio programs.

Even books were affected. Several prestigious authors fled publishers that would not market their books or pushed political agendas. The counter space at Barnes and Nobles is rented you know. Most of our media is controlled. Even when someone starts to question something like Rosie O’Donnell or Phil Donahue, look what the media does to them.


Post 9/11 Americans were scared and turned to television for answers and reassurance something was being done. It was used as a tool to manipulate people. I think deliberately misinforming and misleading honest people is disturbing. You think that is ok? To tell people Sadaam had WMDS just so we can steal oil we don't and should not need? All the while losing our sons and daugthters?

Hmmm....let's see how many votes this brings in for him.

---

Yes, it was a big deal when Andre Schiffrin and his colleagues left Pantheon--but they were being pressured to publish more books that made MONEY--not books that reflected a right-wing agenda.

That was when Random House (Pantheon's parent company) was owned by the Newhouse family's Advance Publications, before RH was bought by Bertelsmann. There was NO pressure on Pantheon or any of the other Random House companies to publish right-wing books.

That's just poppycoCk.

Vonnegut and Terkel did NOT leave their publishers for political reasons. And Chomsky (not "Chomp-") published his last book with Metropolitan/Henry Holt, which is part of the Holtzbrinck group, another German conglomerate.

---

And how just many of Mr. McCain's children are serving in the war?

---

now who's placing his faith in the media?

---