Thursday, July 31, 2008

Hadn't Heard That Bit

Another of John McCain's campaign ads criticises Obama for skipping a visit with wounded troops, ostensibly because the candidate wouldn't be allowed to bring cameras along. (By the way, that's not true. As always, the truth is much more complicated than can be put into a 30-second campaign ad. See FactCheck.org for details.)

So McCain ran an advertisement objurgating Obama for not having visited the wounded troops in Germany.

But you know what's really funny? McCain also made a second advertisement objurgating Obama for having visited the wounded troops in Germany ready to air... just in case.

BusinessWeek has the goods:
What the McCain campaign doesn’t want people to know, according to one GOP strategist I spoke with over the weekend, is that they had an ad script ready to go if Obama had visited the wounded troops saying that Obama was...wait for it...using wounded troops as campaign props. So, no matter which way Obama turned, McCain had an Obama bashing ad ready to launch. I guess that’s political hardball. But another word for it is the one word that most politicians are loathe to use about their opponents—a lie.
I really, honestly wanted to like John McCain and his campaign this year. Truthfully, he is a very moderate Republican, and is easily one of the most effective public servants that conservatism has. Unfortunately, the behavior of his campaign is making it very difficult to give the guy very much affection. He keeps putting out one misleading statement about his opponent after another.

17 comments:

mike said...

Hey Dude, When are you flying over here, soon??

Jil Wrinkle said...

Which Mike is this?

Chief said...

Hmmmmmm, so what you are saying is McCain, who is a politician, runs misleading commercials, and will say half truths and out right lies to get elected? Isn't that what ALL politicians do? I really, honestly want to be like/believe any politician...but I can not. Maybe I am to cynical when it comes to politics. Or maybe I have just been disappointed to many times by men/women who had so much potential sell out.

Chief said...

"To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished." Quoted from Proudhon.

Issarat said...

It is pretty funny to watch the two candidates 'go at it' with ads; McCain is getting creamed. When is the first debate?

DAGO said...

McCain is running misleading ads and Obama is saying what everyone wants to hear. He tells one group this, and another group that. Even if THAT contradicts THIS. And Factcheck is about non biased as FOX is fair and balanced.

What I want to know is does Obama have the intestinal fortitude to reach over a table and snatch a Terrorist by the throat and call a spade a spade....no pun intended.

Unknown said...

Why so much focus on terrorism

People always focus on irrelevant subjects at the end of a cycle

Why not just focus on the economy. if that goes down the tubes over the next decade US wont have the power. Poeple wont hate america.
Problem solved

Jil Wrinkle said...

Dago, We tried that "snatch at terrorist by the throat" attitude for the last 8 years, and you can see where it got us (or where it didn't, in terms of Osama Bin Laden and all his friends). The Pakistanis certainly haven't been very helpful and, well, you can see how well that's been working with Iran so far. Name a single "Muslim trouble spot" on the planet that is more peaceful now because of American foreign policy than it was in 2001. I'm guessing (and I'll bet that you would agree) that there are more potential and practicing terrorists in the world now lining up for a shot at America than there were in 2001.

Owen, a nice comment for a change! Thanks. I agree with what you said. Terrorism isn't irrelevant, but a smooth American economy and an America not focused on war are much more important... especially to Americans, but to the rest of the world as well. Focusing on ourselves and our own problems for a change will make everyone happy.

Chief said...

"Focusing on ourselves and our own problems for a change will make everyone happy." Really? You mean until the next success terrorist attach within American borders. Then everybody (including you) will be asking why the current administration did not do more to protect us. I agree fixing the economic mess Bush and Congress made is so important. But the security of the american people will always be number one. Terrorists and protecting our southern borders should be number one issue. Fixing economy number 2 (but I believe america can multi task and accomplish both with the right leadership....both in the executive branch and congress).

Chief said...

"I'm guessing (and I'll bet that you would agree) that there are more potential and practicing terrorists in the world now lining up for a shot at America than there were in 2001." The terrorists were doing just fine before Sep 11. There were numerouse bombings of our navel ship (USS Cole) and several US Embassies and several other bombings world wide....all well before Sep 11. Did not look like they had any recruiting worries before sep 11.

Chief said...

"that there are more potential and practicing terrorists in the world now lining up for a shot at America than there were in 2001" I spent one tour in Iraq and one in Afganistan during my 22 years on active duty (that does not count other deployments around the world). In Iraq it is not just muslims lining up for a shot...it is Iranian Muslims, many of which are active duty military in the Iranian army. The destablizing force in iraq is the organized, planned, and resourced efforts of other countries around Iraq (ie Iran and Sryia).

Chief said...

Here is another thing you do not hear on the MSM.

Bottom line...we may see Israel making a move against Iran...which would force us to support Israel in a war with Iran. We would have to support Israel regardles of who is in the white house at that time. Even if Israel were do conduct a preemptive strike (with the claim that Iran has a nuke) we would still support Israel. I really do not see the US role in the middle east diminishing (apparently something that you want to happen). In fact it will expand and it will get bloodier. People like you do not understand this but....world war III started a long time ago. And it is here to stay for a long time to come. If it means anything I wish you were right...I wish peace was here, I wish that soldiers and marines were no longer needed in this world. But we are needed. More so now then ever. Just my two cents.

Jil Wrinkle said...

Chief,

Good comments though obviously we don't agree on everything.

(1) As far as the next terrorist attack in our country: Whatever we protect, of course the terrorists won't attack. By logical conclusion though, until we protect 100% of America, terrorists will still (will always) have something to attack. The war on terrorism has a lot of similarities to the war on drugs: Getting foreign governments and foreign populations to stamp out extremism at home is the best and most effective place to focus our efforts.

(2) Before, terrorists were scattered bands of 30 or 40 guys making bombs and carrying out maybe one successful attack per year if they were lucky. Now, Iraq has entire armies of terrorists (see your Iran-in-Iraq comment) operating, and the entire Pakistan-Afghanistan border is for all intents and purposes a terrorist nation." Every teenage boy in the Middle East has been taught to hate America; those who lost a father, brother, or even mother or sister to the war in Iraq don't need to be taught. There are millions of angry people who, if given the opportunity, would become a terrorist against America.

(3) Yes, Israel is going to attack Iran. I've been watching that closely. I'd say it is 100% likely before November... or at latest in the days immediately before Obama takes office. Personally, on a rudimentary level, I don't have a problem with it... although on a common sense level, I do. I'm not going to get too upset over Israel flattening the Iranian nuclear program. I have a suspicion though that American troops won't be following Isreali warplanes into downtown Tehran.

(4) You may not have been reading my blogs for too long, but I have a longstanding position: I'm a really big supporter of finding alternative fuels to petroleum-based fuel because the only reason the middle east matters, the only reason the terrorists have money, and the only reason that whole area of the world has any power, is because of oil. The moment the first passenger jet and/or cargo ship crosses an ocean without using a drop of petrol, is the moment that the entire Middle East, from Libya to Pakistan, becomes irrelevant, and chokes to death in the dust of the desert, penniless, alone and forgotten by the civilized world. That's where I think our focus should be. It may not completely solve the problem of terrorism, but it certainly will cripple it. Within decades of that happening, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia... they will all be at about the same level as Somalia, Ethiopia, Yemen, and the Sudan: Powerless and pointless.

DAGO said...

Jil,

I’m on the ground, here in Iraq and I’m telling you this place is very different then when I got here in 05’. You need to stop listening to these “Talking Heads” who haven’t set foot here or who have stepped off in the green zone for a day or two and all of a sudden are experts. As long as we don’t soften our stance WE BEAT THEM HERE IN IRAQ. We are now traveling down roads that were unheard of just 2 years ago. That’s why you see a shift over to Afghanistan. Trust me its easier to fight them in Iraq then Afghanistan, ask the Russians. I’ll get back to Afghanistan later.

Incase you don’t understand the strategy of the whole Iraq thing as I didn’t before I came here, First: the path of least resistance, yea I know Least Resistance, look how long we’ve been there….. Can you imagine if we chose to fight them in a place of more resistance? Would you rather have fought them on American soil? Say your home state? Second; draw them into the battlefield of OUR CHOICE, not theirs, this kind of goes hand and hand with the first but is a little different. Third; and probably most important, Al-Qaida is a mind set, these fanatics are fighting a fight from centuries ago, incase you haven’t noticed the Leaders are mostly RICH, SPOILED offspring of the ULTRA RICH. I believe the children of the rich pose the most danger to society for three reasons, one they are educated, two
They always seem to have a cause, mostly against the establishment or those who their parents and the rest of their parent’s social circle have hated. And third, they have the funds to backup their cause. I’ll use Patty Hearst as an example. Or better yet how about OBL him self….

The people of Iraq are finally starting to see who the real enemy is, Al-Qaida have murdered untold amounts of this population. Despite all of their propaganda, the people of Iraq are starting to see. They are welcoming us,
THIS I SEE WITH MY OWN TWO EYES!!! Yea there are still some who don’t and probably never will, we will deal with them. Talk about a last ditch effort, they are strapping bombs on retarded woman and killing IRAQI’S trying to get them to turn against us. The biggest and most costly mistake we made here was allowing the Iraqi army to disband, but I’m sure the administration was counting on support from other world powers. Instead they turned their backs on us. Maybe they forgot this isn’t just an American problem, it’s a world problem. They would rather talk then just reach out and snatch these pieces of excrement up by the collar. Hey we can fight them now and be done with it once and for all or continue to talk and fight them for centuries more. There’s a whole lot more on this but I can’t really say on this blog, I’ve probably already said too much.

Afghanistan, well all I’m going to say on that is, hey maybe we can get some help from other world powers there instead of tokens. In my opinion we should have started in Saudi Arabia and worked our way across the entire Middle East. We should be bombing the shit out of Iran right now; they are the biggest threat to the WORLD right now. These Muslims are still fighting amongst them selves about who took over the religion after Muhammad died. I don’t believe in organized religion but of all of them this one takes the cake. This guy plagiarized all the known religions of the time and just picked the moon God, Allah as their one god.

While I’m still on my soapbox let me talk about OBAMA, first I have to say something about BUSH. I HATE BUSH, I hate what he has done to our country in terms of turning it into a police state, I think he’s as stupid a puppet as I have ever seen. I don’t like his attitude; I don’t like his blinded religious value (no difference between him and these fanatic muslins) there isn’t a whole lot I like about him. I do however like his stance on this war. I wish we would have picked a better spokesman; this whole situation might have turned out a whole lot different in terms of support from other nations of the world.

Obama on the other hand, now here is a speaker, I’ve been paying attention to him, he says what everyone wants to hear, even if he contradicts what he said on his previous speech. That’s not the biggest problem I have with him, we all know the old saying, the masses are asses, my biggest concern with him is his handlers, especially that Russian guy, Brzezinski or how ever you spell it, you know the same guy behind Jimmy Carter, we all remember how that administration turned out. Obama is even talking about the very same windfall tax Carter did, LOL. Come to think of it wasn’t Brzezinski one of the founders of the Trilateral Commission along with that Rockefeller guy, you know the folks who back in the 70’s wrote about turning our economy into a service economy and moving all of our industrial base over to China so they could make huge profits by paying low wages to the workers. Didn’t that backfire? Now instead of not having to worry about China because any instability with them would be mutual economic destruction, we had to turn to NAFTA because there are other countries to buy their goods so now they can call all their chips in on us without having to worry about us buying their goods.
Now we have to develop South America so these greedy ULTRA RICH &^*%#@$ can make a bigger buck instead of just keeping it in our own backyard, remember, the strategy that made us the Superpower of the world that we no longer are. Don’t forget Nancy, oh bowy I can really see it now, Nancy and Barak…….

Obama aint nothing new, I think McCain is more sincere then Obama, remember McCain is “The Maverick Republican”, the “Liberal Republican”, He’s been called all kinds of things from the far right though the years.

The only problem with this war is the other countries didn’t stand behind us, lets face it we need bad guys, Russia is making Billions on arms sales to Iran, who in turn is selling them to Al-Qaida and the list goes on.

Don’t forget the economy, it started to deflate BEFORE Bush took office, can you imagine what would have happened without the war? Everyone knows wars help the economy, or so “They” say.

Ok I’m off my soap box now, I gotta get to work.

DAGO said...

Jil,
I read your comments to Chef and just thought I had to comment my self:

(1) As far as the next terrorist attack in our country: Whatever we protect, of course the terrorists won't attack. By logical conclusion though, until we protect 100% of America, terrorists will still (will always) have something to attack. The war on terrorism has a lot of similarities to the war on drugs: Getting foreign governments and foreign populations to stamp out extremism at home is the best and most effective place to focus our efforts.

I totally agree on that.

(2) Before, terrorists were scattered bands of 30 or 40 guys making bombs and carrying out maybe one successful attack per year if they were lucky. Now, Iraq has entire armies of terrorists (see your Iran-in-Iraq comment) operating, and the entire Pakistan-Afghanistan border is for all intents and purposes a terrorist nation." Every teenage boy in the Middle East has been taught to hate America; those who lost a father, brother, or even mother or sister to the war in Iraq don't need to be taught. There are millions of angry people who, if given the opportunity, would become a terrorist against America.

WRONG:
These Terrorists’ were not just 40 or 50 guys making bombs. They are a well organized Army. Unfortunately we trained the Leaders. They are the Mujahidin from the Russian war. They fought in Kosovo as well. Like any Army they get new recruits, mostly from the ranks of the impoverished and disillusioned. Those who have nothing to live for, and there is plenty of that here.

Middle Eastern children have been taught to hate Americans long before the Iraq war. This all goes back to the Israel thing. Everyone thinks Israel was promised that land by GOD (Manifest Destiny?) but if you look at the bible, GOD gave that land to the Jews during the time of Moses and they lost it. They forfeited that deal. If you believe that kind of stuff. I don’t but have to look through the eyes of the enemy to understand them.
I’m sure these Muslim fanatics would find something else to fight over, it’s the nature of their Fascist (or maybe Totalitarian is a better choice of words) religion. Their Higher Ranks have been fighting most of their adult life.

(3) Yes, Israel is going to attack Iran. I've been watching that closely. I'd say it is 100% likely before November... or at latest in the days immediately before Obama takes office. Personally, on a rudimentary level, I don't have a problem with it... although on a common sense level, I do. I'm not going to get too upset over Israel flattening the Iranian nuclear program. I have a suspicion though that American troops won't be following Isreali warplanes into downtown Tehran.

I Agree:
I think the only reason we wouldn’t follow them though is because of funding. The Left just won’t buy it due to their hatred to the right, unfortunately. Don’t think we aren’t in there already, that’s all I will say on here.

(4) You may not have been reading my blogs for too long, but I have a longstanding position: I'm a really big supporter of finding alternative fuels to petroleum-based fuel because the only reason the middle east matters, the only reason the terrorists have money, and the only reason that whole area of the world has any power, is because of oil. The moment the first passenger jet and/or cargo ship crosses an ocean without using a drop of petrol, is the moment that the entire Middle East, from Libya to Pakistan, becomes irrelevant, and chokes to death in the dust of the desert, penniless, alone and forgotten by the civilized world. That's where I think our focus should be. It may not completely solve the problem of terrorism, but it certainly will cripple it. Within decades of that happening, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia... they will all be at about the same level as Somalia, Ethiopia, Yemen, and the Sudan: Powerless and pointless.

I agree in part:
I agree that if we get off of their OIL they will be done. But they are a crafty people and are finding other ways of shoring their economies up. Holding our debt is one. I also agree alternative fuels are a must if we want to survive as a planet but we can do this slowly. We can’t just in a few years change, to costly. I kind of like the Pickens plan. I also love my Davidson’s. I think if we start drilling off shore it will kick them in the teeth.

Unknown said...

Indeed so would it not have been more ept to pour a trillion dollars into alternative fuel tech than invade Iraq

BTW The amount of petrodollars flowing back into US markets. The middle east will own wall street within a decade. If they want to that is

The only way the middleast will crumble will be if America does

bring it on

DAGO said...

Owen,
Am I to understand you as saying we should have just shrugged off the Twin Towers and invested the money into Alternative fuels? Don’t forget we Americans aren’t the only ones using Petroleum.

That was the third time they went after the Towers, once bombed the parking garage, once foiled attempt, and finally bringing them down killing thousands of Americans. That’s not including the Pentagon or the plane in Pennsylvania or the numerous bombings throughout the years. Enough is enough, its time to fight. How many times can we turn the other cheek?

I can still see those images of people jumping out of the windows to their death. I know Iraq had nothing to do with it, But the strategic value of Iraq in the Middle Eastern Theater is enough. And don’t think we are going anywhere any time soon, I don’t care what Obama is saying now. We have enduring basses here, don’t forget Politicians have a way of parsing words, combat troops probably account for ¼ ~1/3 of the troops here. They may pull COMBAT troops out but many others will stay a long time.

When I first came here troops were riding in the back of Humvee’s that had minimal armor, 50 cal’s were mounted on poles welded to plates bolted to the bed. Now we have MRAPS that can withstand IED blasts. The Masters of War have evolved to fight in any theater. I’m interested in Russia exercising in the Polar regions, I wonder what that’s all about…

PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST!!!!
Im all for it.