Washblog

McCain: If it was as clear-cut as someone described, Tim, Joe Lieberman would not have been re-elected in the state of Connecticut.

Yours Truly: Senator McCain, If the presidential election had been held in 2006 with Al Gore and Joe Lieberman running against you and any Republican flunky, despite a Democratic takeover of both houses -despite a Democratic retaking of both Houses, -Gore would have lost if Lieberman were again chosen as his VP running mate.

Lieberman has no national legitimacy and is in no way a bellweather of American political opinion outside his support base in his home state.

McCain: Americans are frustrated, they are angry, and they are fed up. And what we need to do is show them a path to success.

Yours Truly: You bet your sweet bippy we're frustrated, angry and fed up. What makes you think yours and Bush's definition of success is something any of us EVER wanted?

McCain: Because I think--and also I think we need to make them more aware of the consequences of failure, which would be chaos in the region. And sooner or later, I think Americans might have to return.

Yours Truly: Believe you me, Senator. Once they are out of Iraq - when no legitimate justification offered by ANY Republican for our going in there in the first place was EVER validated - both your greedy party AND the Democrats will play hell trying to garner support for a return.

McCain: So I understand their frustration, I believe that President Bush now has the right strategy.

Yours Truly: Saying that to an audience of Russert and a camera with a mechanical eye is quite cowardly if you ask me. Try saying that to 3000 families who've lost a loved one because President Bush has been wrong every time and you sit there mouth watering for a presidential nomination, telling your fellow citizens that altho their pretend president has yet to bullseye the noble cause of their loved one's deaths,  trust him this time.

McCain:  I've been deeply disappointed in the strategy in the past, as is well known, and I think this is our last chance. Will it succeed? I can't guarantee that. I think we have a good chance of it, but I guarantee the catastrophic results of failure.

Yours Truly: YOU'VE been deeply disappointed?

YOU want to pay for one last chance with more American blood?

A last chance to do what?

Senator, you and Graham and other party Senators have declared that Democrats have no strategy.

You have only the FAILED strategy and you keep buying tickets to try one more dime to throw the dime in the bottle.

The catastrophic results of yours and the president;s failure are HERE and NOW Senator, not in the future. The surge is your pretend president's and your own  failed strategy.

Opposing that surge is a wise strategy that will work wonders to protect the lives of our children.

Opposing escalation and supporting withdrawal is wisdom in the absence of any frustrated dream of empire

Opposing the surge brings merciful end to our national illusion that we are still powerful and influential enough there enough to fix Iraq - to  make it all right with one surging ejaculation.

The surge itself is ample reason never to vote you or any like you into office sir.

Russert:President Bush disagreed with General Casey, so he's removed. Why didn't the president listen to his generals when they advised no more troops?

McCAIN: Because it was clearly a failed policy. From the beginning, many of us knew that it was a failed strategy.  

RUSSERT:Failed policy. General Casey now is returning back to the United States. He's been nominated to be the chief of staff of the Army. Will you support and vote for his confirmation?

McCAIN: I have very serious concerns about General Casey's nomination. I'm concerned about failed leadership, the message that sends to the rest of the military. I have hard questions to ask him, and I--I'm very skeptical about it.

MR. RUSSERT: As of today, you're leaning no.

McCAIN: Yes. Yes.

Yours Truly: The McCain/Bush now-they've-got-it-right-this--time-send-more-troops is clearly a failed policy. From the beginning, Senator, many of us knew that is was a failed strategy.

And I have very serious concerns about any nomination of Senator McCain.

I'm concerned about failed leadership and the message that hoodwinking the American electorate with toadying to a failed president, a discredited right wing religious lobby  and the aspirant's  party's failed strategy sends to the rest of the military.

I have hard questions to ask YOU, Senator and I'm very skeptical about what you think you are doing.

RUSSERT: As you well know, Democrats are now referring to the increase in American troops, the so-called surge, as the McCain doctrine. Do you accept that?

McCAIN:Well, there's a McCain principle, and that is that when you raise your hand and you vote to send young Americans into harm's way that you will commit yourself and your efforts to completing that mission successfully. I don't know how lightly others may take that vote, but that's the principle that I've operated under, and--but not everybody gets a doctrine named after them.

I really believe that those who oppose this policy have some obligation to propose an alternative strategy besides withdrawal in four to six months. That's not a strategy; that's a retreat.

And the--this resolution is basically a vote of no confidence in the men and women we are sending over there. We're saying, "We're sending you--we're not going to stop you from going there, but we don't believe you can succeed and we're not willing to support that." I don't think the troops would find that an expression of support. And to accuse the president of the United States of, quote, "rushing troops over there" is beneath, frankly, the behavior level that I think is appropriate for members of Congress.

But if we can show them a path to success, I think you will see increasing support. But I think it's going to be long and hard and difficult, and I'm very disturbed when administration officials start talking about quick withdrawals. That's not going to work.

Yours Truly: If I may restate the McCain Principle in the context of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq,
"when you raise your hand and you vote to send young Americans into harm's way,
that you will commit yourself and your efforts to completing that mission successfully no matter how fully discredited the mission,
no matter how non-noble the cause,
how incredibly murderous the objective
and how totally dehumanizing and destructive of an entire nation
and how braggadocio your appointees get about shockful and aweful demonstrations
no matter how worthless and tragically wasteful that discredited mission is,
not to mention the ways and means used to send young Americans to their deaths,

what principle have you operated under, Senator? The principle of what?

There is no mission left to accomplish by leadership with its self-made failure so bad that there is no honorable way to beat up  any more Middle Eastern countries no matter how wise you pretend yourself to be in terms of what's best for every other human being on the planet.

McCain: When we left Vietnam, Tim, and came home, the Vietnamese didn't want to follow us. If we leave Iraq, I am convinced that al-Qaeda and terrorist organizations will want to follow us home.

Yours Truly:That which convinces you Senator, that .... THING ... that prompts in you the Bush/Cheney wolf-cry that if we don't fight them over there we will have to fight them here. What THING is is that convinces you of this? This particular remark, Senatory McCain, so echoing of the most notorious and discredited vice presidential liar in American History, is not any rock upon which to found a candidacy ....

... that is unless a vote for you is a vote for more of the same.

I'm going to end with a repeat of this paragraph, this shameful paragraph which becomes the ultimate testimony against your pretense of being wise in the American way of doing things:

And the--this resolution is basically a vote of no confidence in the men and women we are sending over there. We're saying, "We're sending you--we're not going to stop you from going there, but we don't believe you can succeed and we're not willing to support that." I don't think the troops would find that an expression of support. And to accuse the president of the United States of, quote, "rushing troops over there" is beneath, frankly, the behavior level that I think is appropriate for members of Congress.

This quote - so reminding of the lying logic and blatant swift-bloating of the 2004 and 2006  Republican National campaign of dishonesty, empty integrity and downright insult to the American voter -  is enough  in and of itself  to usher you out the door of a room in which we might find  real presidential-class candidates.

Walk away from it sir ...

Don't run.