John McCain in his own words:
This is how you run against a war-monger. This is how you attack his supposed strengths. The American people are done with this war, and they are most certainly done with this disastrous, draconian, oppressive Republican mindset. McCain, Mr. 26%, and the rest of their Republican party are dinosaurs, awaiting extinction. War is not the answer, no matter how valiant and virtuous they paint it.
Good luck with that in November? Exactly.
>War is not the answer, no matter how valiant and virtuous they paint it.<
republicans don’t paint war as valiant and virtuous; they consider much of our military valiant and virtuous.
republicans consider war a sometimes necessary evil.
dissenting opinion respectfully submitted,
james
>This is how you run against a war-monger<
mccain is not a war-monger. soldiers dislike war more than anyone because they’ve seen it up close and have been personally affected by it, often seeing friends hurt and killed.
>The American people are done with this war<
it’s true that some want to withdraw; but others, including myself, don’t.
>and they are most certainly done with this disastrous, draconian, oppressive Republican mindset<
I was a liberal democrat for many years. then, over time and with maturity and experience, I slowly became a conservative republican.
now I’m proud to be a republican. it’s certainly not a mindset that is “disastrous” or “oppressive.”
>Mr. 26%Republican party are dinosaurs, awaiting extinction<
for the good of the world, I certainly hope not.
>War is not the answer<
War is not the answer 99% of the time. but war is sometimes the answer. for example, war was the answer against hitler and his ally, imperial japan.
James,
Thank you for adding your thoughts. I doubt you’ll be surprised by this, but I wholeheartedly disagree with you. McCain is running for nothing more than Bush’s third term, on virtually an identical platform: an endless war in Iraq / Iran, continued tax cuts for the super wealthy, elimination of regulation on big business and an end to any protections that might constrain their profit motive, unrestrained and highly illegal domestic spying, unchecked and rampant corruption at all levels of government. I could go on and on. No matter how you slice it, it’s clear that the vast majority of Americans agree with my assertion that the previous two Bush terms have in fact been disastrous and oppressive.
I too was once a Republican, and still feel a close affinity to many of their supposed ideals, none of which have seen the light of day these past seven and a half years.
Because of that and many other reasons, we as a people are no longer fooled by the stagecraft and elaborate sleight of hand — just witness the rise of Obama, an authentic and genuinely transformational leader, versus the puffed up packaging of George W. Bush. It’s clear the Republicans are in for a long and brutal winter out of power.
Thanks for writing,
Scott
>McCain is running for nothing more than Bush’s third term, on virtually an identical platforman endless war in Iraqcontinued tax cuts for the super wealthy<
you admit, tho, that republicans in office mean tax cuts for everyone, right?
a difference between republicans and democrats is that republicans generally aren’t resentful of the rich simply for being rich: if tax cuts for all (a tried and true republican stance) means tax cuts for the weathly, that’s fine for us!
>an endless war in Iraq<
the length of the war is not close to endless; it is a few years. and during those years america has not experienced another 9-11-type attack. that’s not a coincidence, but rather a causal relationship. if bush takes responsibility for sending us to war (and he does), he should also take the credit for keeping america safe from terrorist attacks within our borders.
I referenced war world two in a previous comment. that was a long time ago and we still have troops in germany and japan. but the difference is that they are not fighting; they are just stationed there.
mccain made the comment that if necessary, the US should keep soldiers in iraq for a hundred years. he clarified that he doesn’t want our soldiers fighting in iraq for a hundred years.
so he made a reasonable statement. if the fighting can stop soon (by and american victory), we can bring the bulk of our soldiers away from that region. but to keep a small contingent there for many years would be fine — it would be a situation like germany and japan.
>elimination of regulation on big businessan end to any protections that might constrain their profit motiveunrestrained and highly illegal domestic spyingNo matter how you slice it, it’s clear that the vast majority of Americans agree with my assertion that the previous two Bush terms have in fact been disastrous and oppressive<
I slice it this way: a third of americans tend conservative like me; a third of americans tend liberal like you; and the remaining third don’t have a political opinion due to apathy and/or ignorance and confusion.
>elimination of regulation on big businessan end to any protections that might constrain their profit motiveunrestrained and highly illegal domestic spying<
tho of course we differ on how much it should be restrained, domestic intelligence is far from unrestrained.
>elimination of regulation on big businessan end to any protections that might constrain their profit motive<
this is a clear-cut area where we differ: conservatives don’t want to constrain profit motive; liberals do.
>elimination of regulation on big business<
tho of course we differ on how much it should be regulated, no serious republican player has advocated complete elimination of regulation.
I post multiple posts because for some reason when I post longer posts, they are truncated. I think it’s due to my use of carets (or whatever they’re called): ><
>I too was once a Republican, and still feel a close affinity to many of their supposed ideals<
what ideas are those?
> we as a people are no longer fooled by the stagecraft and elaborate sleight of hand — just witness the rise of Obama, an authentic and genuinely transformational leader<
actually, it is obama who is using stagecraft and sleight of hand:
bush and mccain were never the most conservative nominees when they ran for office. obama is much farther left than bush and mccain are right.
obama’s voting record in the senate (which you can look up) makes him the most liberal (the most left) senator in the nation.
yet he would not be the democrat nominee if he didn’t have broad support among moderates. that, my friends, is stagecraft and sleight of hand!
respectfully submitted,
james
James, I’m traveling for the next few days, but should have some time to formulate a more detailed response. Thanks for your continued care and concern. Check back on Monday for more.