Wednesday, June 11, 2008

John McCain... your ads aren't welcomed here.

WE'VE MOVED! Democratic Convention Watch is now at http://www.DemocraticConventionWatch.com

My Friends... for anybody that's been subjected to the vomit-inducing Google ad with McCain and Lieberman I would like to apologize. The ad has been blocked.

My Friends... Do they think adding Lieberman makes us think McCain is going to be a uniter not a divider? Seeing Lieberman only pisses me off more.

My Friends... I can't allow a McCain ad on our site without a reminder of who's trying to gain your support.


My Friends... John McCain just said it's not important when the troops come home from Iraq.

Note: It may take a little while before the block starts working.

Comments (9)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Login or signup now to comment.
I heard him say this regarding the troops this a.m. Talk about losing focus! How is it not important when they come home, when they've been sent there under unethical premises to begin with? I'd like to see them ALL get home safely now, and end Bush/McCain's wet dream.
Reply
Democrats should remember that the Bill Clinton impeachment was a strictly partisan affair until a certain sanctimonious Pharisee broke ranks and made it a moral crusade. As long as the Democrats stood together is was just more inane partisan bickering, but once Lieberman spoke up they all had to cover themselves before their family-values constituents. Lieberman's sanctimonious finger-pointing turned another Whitewater witch-hunt into an impeachment proceeding.
Reply
That's okay. Every once in a while random ads turn out to be like that. I remember reading one article by a proselytizing atheist friend of mine with the standard spiel against religion, and below that were church ads about salvation generated randomly by Google. Heh.
Reply
There is a significant difference between what McCain is implying about leaving troops in Iraq to occupy indefinitely and the troops that currently remain in South Korea. If the troops in Iraq are expected to keep the peace and be pillars of stability, the job is inherently less safe than that of the troops maintaining the border between the North and South Korean states. I think this was a fairly large mistake for him to make that will continue to haunt him in the future.
Reply
redliberal's avatar

redliberal · 880 weeks ago

What McCain says in the clip is perfectly reasonable and historically consistent with American foreign deployments, which tend to be lengthy and contribute to stability. Considering the 54 countries since WWII and 14 currently with significant US deployments, minimal casualties (and stability) are almost always more important than a withdrawal date.

You may feel that Iraq is exceptional, because the invasion was somehow exceptional legally or otherwise. It was not - most US invasions or occupations have come without the international community's imprimatur.

Grenada and Panama are two of the more recent. Many ops, like the bombing of Serbia, invasion of Kosovo and actions in Afghanistan, were NATO-led, not UN sanctioned. Meanwhile, the US still occupies Guantanamo Bay and has colonies in the Pacific and Caribbean, . Heck, Hawa'ii was outright annexed, not just occupied.

So making withdrawal rather than stability the only priority in Iraq uniquely is a bit rich.
Reply
Here's a unique new unscientific poll of Obama supporters, asking them what quality is their most important in Obama's Veep choice.

http://www.ohboyobama.com/polls/most-helpful-obam...
Reply
I commend you for removing the McCain ads from your website. Personally, though, I click on every McCain ad I see, because advertisers generally have to pay per-click-through for web ads, and it gives me a sense of satisfaction to know that I'm costing the McCain campaign money.
Reply
3investors's avatar

3investors · 880 weeks ago

Redliberal, NO, McCain's completely wrong! He's comparing apples to oranges here. It is true that the US has bases in many other countries around the world, but NONE of those countries had the type of INFIGHTING we see in Iraq. The closest is with former Yugoslavia, but "Balkanization" is not an option in Iraq. We learned our lesson in Somalia and got out.
Reply
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
redliberal's avatar

redliberal · 880 weeks ago

3investors: It's apples to apples: US occupations are rarely all roses. Iraq is hardly home to the first insurgency or tribal strife US forces have encountered. Long term stability comes only over the long term - it doesn't magically appear if you don't show up for the struggle. That's why the "infighting" in Iraq is an argument for McCain's statement, not against it.

Even today, Iraq is not that unique. Afghanistan's insurgency is arguably more intractable in 2008 than Iraq and worsening, you just don't hear about it as much via US news sources. If your point is to withdraw whenever internal elements want to cause US forces harm, those elements will be sure to appear every time.

I would hope that Americans collectively feel a great sense of responsibility towards Iraq. After all, more than Japan, or Korea, or Germany or Yugoslavia, the clumsy and arrogant early stages of the US occupation nurtured the insurgency. Taking responsibility in Iraq means dealing with the mess before worrying about a withdrawal date. Abandoning Iraqis to the unleashed butchery is a course without honour or decency, and is not worthy of the United States or its ideals.
Reply

Comments by