by BarbinMD
Sun Jul 27, 2008 at 02:00:37 PM PDT
Look, I respect and admire Senator Obama, and if I have ever treated him in a disrespectful way I don't know of it. Americans want a respectful debate. They don't want us to finger-point and question each other's character and integrity. - John McCain
With more than three months until the November election, it’s hard to believe that we are at a point where we must ask, exactly how low is John McCain willing to go? For someone who claims to hold the highest standards and has vowed repeatedly to carry out a "respectful" campaign, McCain has questioned Barack Obama’s patriotism, his commitment to our troops serving overseas and has even stooped to thinly veiled charges of sedition, and McCain is willing to distort and lie to do so. It’s become clear that John McCain has made a conscious choice to throw his much vaunted honor under the bus.
Let’s look at just some of the ways John McCain has chosen to carry out the respectful debate that the American people want:
Obama Would Rather Lose A War In Order To Win A Political Campaign - John McCain
Had these contemptible words been said in the heat of the moment, it would be one thing. But John McCain has not only said it repeatedly, he defends it.
STEPHANOPOULOS: When you say someone would rather lose a war, a candidate, that’s questioning his honor, his decency, his character.
MCCAIN: All I’m saying is — and I will repeat — he does not understand. I’m not questioning his patriotism. I am saying that he made the decision, which was political, in order to help him get the nomination of his party.
So, McCain is not questioning Obama’s patriotism, only his honor, decency and character. McCain is saying that Obama is willing for U.S. troops to die in the interest of his political ambition, but no, he’s not questioning his patriotism. And why does McCain feel that this is a legitimate argument to make? It’s quite simple. Because he wants to win.
morePosted July 27th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
In light of the McCain campaign’s
ridiculous new ad, the Obama campaign is sending around
a speech John McCain delivered on the Senate floor in May 2007:
“How can we possibly find honor in using the fate of our servicemen to score political advantage in Washington? There is no pride to be had in such efforts. We are at war, a hard and challenging war, and we do no service for the best of us — those who fight and risk all on our behalf — by playing politics with their service.”
“How can we possibly find honor in using the fate of our servicemen to score political advantage in Washington?” How, indeed.
On a related note, Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska, a conservative Republican who joined Barack Obama for the Middle East portion of last week’s trip, was asked this morning about the new McCain ad, as well as
McCain’s assertion this week that Obama deliberately hopes for a U.S. military defeat. Hagel, a long-time McCain ally and the former co-chairman of McCain’s first presidential campaign, is
unimpressed by his friend’s outrageous conduct.
“I think John is treading on some very thin ground here when he impugns motives and when we start to get into, ‘You’re less patriotic than me. I’m more patriotic.’ I admire and respect John McCain very much. I have a good relationship. To this day we do. We talk often. I talked to him right before I went to Iraq, as a matter of fact. John’s better than that.”
On the new ad, Hagel added, “I do not think it was appropriate.”
As for McCain being “better than that,” I used to hope so. In fact, I actually expected McCain to at least pretend to be better than this beyond the month of July.
No such luck.
McBlunder's ad claims:
"John McCain is always there for our troops."Here's how McBlunder values the lives of our troops
McCain said based on "
conditions on the ground in Iraq." So based on that, McBlunder, is it yesterday or 100 years?
Here's how McBlunder supports our troops:
Thursday, May 22, 2008 16:28 EDT
By a vote of 75-22, the Senate approved an expanded version of the GI bill today. Proposed by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., it's the biggest expansion of the bill in the past quarter-century, according to the New York Times. But it has also been opposed by, among others, President Bush and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain.
Bush, McCain and the others who've opposed Webb's bill
argue that the expanded provisions -- the government would pay tuition and expenses at a four-year public university for anyone who spent three years in the military after 9/11 -- will hurt the military's efforts to retain its troops. Bush has threatened to veto Webb's bill, and McCain introduced one of his own. He did not vote today.
The vote provoked some
heated rhetoric between McCain and Barack Obama. Speaking from the floor of the Senate, Obama said, "I respect Sen. John McCain's service to our country ... But I can't understand why he would line up behind the President in his opposition to this GI Bill. I can't believe why he believes it is too generous to our veterans."
In response, McCain released a harsh -- and lengthy -- statement. "It is typical, but no less offensive, that Senator Obama uses the Senate floor to take cheap shots at an opponent and easy advantage of an issue he has less than zero understanding of," McCain said. "Unlike Senator Obama, my admiration, respect and deep gratitude for America's veterans is something more than a convenient campaign pledge."
moreHow important is the GI Bill to the troops, here:
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service
WASHINGTON, June 5, 2008 – At every “all-hands” meeting he’s had with troops from Zamboanga in the Philippines to Baghdad to Fort Bragg, N.C., the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff gets questions about changes to the GI Bill.
Navy Adm. Mike Mullen said he is delighted that Congress is considering changes that would allow servicemembers to transfer their education benefit to children or spouses. Defense leaders are following the debate in Congress closely and are waiting to see the specifics of the changes, Mullen said.
“From our standpoint, it is transferability first and a more robust benefit second,” the nation’s top military officer said during an interview aboard a C-40 aircraft bringing him back from meetings in Pakistan today.
The chairman said he believes the GI Bill is a sound investment for America in people who have proven their worth and loyalty to the country.
“All servicemembers worth anything want to improve themselves and many enlist specifically for the educational benefits,” Mullen said. That was true when he was commissioned in 1968, and it is true today, he said.
The young men and women in the military today “are serving at a level I have never seen before,” Mullen added. “This benefit would enhance them, enhance the U.S. military and enhance the country.”
Under one proposal, servicemembers could transfer educational benefits to spouses or children. Currently, only servicemembers and veterans can use the benefit. The proposed legislation is attached to the emergency supplemental funding bill for war operations that is awaiting passage.
In a May 21 news conference, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates considers transferability of GI Bill benefits to family members “absolutely imperative.” However, Morrell said, Gates has concerns about how some proposals for GI Bill enhancement would affect the all-volunteer force if they became law.
Gates advocates offering enhanced benefits after six years of service -- rather than the two years in some proposals under consideration in Congress -- to reward servicemembers who opt to re-enlist at least once, Morrell said.
“We are not trying to keep people here forever, but we are trying to create a system in which troops see the benefit of making a career out of the military,” Morrell said at the news conference. “We make an enormous investment in their careers and their futures, and we think it would be very damaging to the all-volunteer force if they were to leave prematurely.”
That would create big problems to the military, particularly as it confronts the global war on terror, he said. “Now, more than ever, we need to hold on to our superbly trained, battle-tested troops,” Morrell said. “They are the key to victory in this conflict.”
Edited to add this from the
DNC:
McCain Gets Score of 30 Percent On Veterans Issues. According to Time, "This is not the first time McCain, who has a proud history of opposing what he views as excessive government spending, has found himself at odds with his fellow veterans on legislation. He's voted for veterans funding bills only 30% of the time, according to a scorecard of roll-call votes put out by the nonpartisan Disabled Americans for America." (time.com; 5/20/08)
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
