You MUST secure your flank!!!

(So much for the “superior commander” argument…)

If Mitt wants to win the war why doesn’t he urge one of his 5 sons to enlist.

Chakra Hammer on February 4, 2008 at 11:59 PM

Wow, you truly are a liberal troll, aren’t you? I had my doubts before, but you’ve laid them to rest.

Wait, 9 million people watch NBC news every night, when you factor in the other mainstream media, you’re looking at half again as many people as listen to rush in a week. Each night, the political hacks on broadcast TV have more viewers than Rush has listeners in a week.

Now, factor in the internet, and how many pundits on here are in favor of McCain? Just today Medved was singing McCain’s praises as he did his show. So if I’m going to take marching orders, who am I more likely to hear?

You McCainiacs are handing the election to the Democrats, which is fine. If someone is going to push a Liberal Agenda in the form of Amnesty, and don’t pretend you expect McCain to stay by his enforcement first pledge, then it should be a Democrat. If someone is going to pull the troops out of Iraq, and don’t think McCain won’t negotiate on that, he said himself he’ll negotiate anything, it should be a Democrat.

Like I said before, if we get McCain and Hillary running in the general election, how are we supposed to highlight Hillary’s liberal record? Other than pointing to all the Liberal issues she’s voted the same as our guy on, how are we going to do that? Voted against the tax cuts, great, our guy led the way. Voted for more firearm restrictions? Great, our guy led the way.

What’s our slogan going to be? John McCain, the Liberal Conservative?

I clicked the link. Sounds like Mitt is expressing Robert Spencer’s “Blogging the Koran”. You Juan McCain supporters gotta stop lying about Mitt. The only thing to fear is: Juan McCain.

mred on February 4, 2008 at 6:59 PM

Why, McCain actually has a Marine Son Serving in Iraq.

Karl on February 4, 2008 at 8:37 PM

I haven’t dismissed anyone who criticizes McCain’s positions – I’ve done my fair share of criticizing him myself – but in the brief bio someone left in one of the comments above there’s no mention of McCarthy’s affiliation with Romney’s campaign.

I don’t consider calling to his association with Romney to be dismissive, do you?

Of course the press will turn against whoever the GOP nominee is. How is that relevant? And since when does the press dictate who the GOP nominee is? Stop blaming the media. Rush and the rest have more influence on the GOP primaries than the MSM does, and McCain is winning anyway.

Yeah, McCarthy is backing Romney… and he’s explaining why. If Romeny’s supporters are to be automatically dismissed from criticizing McCain’s positions, I guess we didn’t need McCain-Feingold in the first place.

There’s a plan.

With no evidence of his grasping the fact that the Iraqi Constitution was compromised with Sharia Law.

Corrupted to the point that the entire enterprise has been rendered moot.

Since all we are now doing is propping up a future Islamic state.

With a majority of Shi’ites, the more radical of the Mohammadens, in control.

Go John.

100 more years!

And no understanding of Islam’s intolerant dogmas or aims.

McCarthy. Conservative attorney, columnist for publications such as National Review and Commentary, former Assistant U.S. Attorney, led the conviction of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and eleven other terrorists, helped prosecute bombers of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, senior member at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, and director of the foundation’s Center for Law and Counterterrorism.

You forgot member of Mitt Romney’s Advisory Committee on the Constitution and the Courts.

Not that that matters or anything.

Sen. John Kerry — the Democrats’ last standard-bearer who, you may recall, entreated McCain to be his running mate

No he didn’t.

the surge is vastly overrated, and the rationale for it is confused at best.

No it isn’t. We needed more troops in Iraq and Afghanistan for the beginning and McCain has been arguing this right since the beginning. The effect on breaking al-Qaeda and reducing troop casualties has been dramatic. Hillary/Obama were NOT saying the same thing. Now the good work by our troops threatens to be undone.

We do need a strategy for reducing Islamic extremism as a whole, and we can begin by weaning ourselves off Middle Eastern oil which pumps our money into the worst regimes.

I’d say South Parks 25% numbers are a GROSS UNDERESTIMATE.

Now we determine if we want liberal bush or bush lite.

McCarthy told to “grow up”, accused of MDS in 5, 4, 3, 2 …

thirteen28 on February 4, 2008 at 6:58 PM

Ditto. Pointing out the credibility of a track record is now drawing lectures on how we should all enjoy the KoolAid.

amerpundit on February 4, 2008 at 6:48 PM

Also the winner of an email debate with Mansour Ijaz on why Islam sux.

Now, later when he’s trailing by twenty points to whomever the Democrats run, you’ll all blame us who won’t support McCain. I should start a betting pool about how many people whine later about the press turning against McCain.

Victory is not an Iraqi “democracy”; it is an America safe from Islamic terror.

His premise neglects that Iraqi “democracy,” or at least stability, can abet a strategic victory in two ways:

1. The neocon ideal that pluralism and a measure of political freedom associated with reduced terror. Or, if you find that too starry-eyed …

2. The fact that a stable, democratic Iraq will discredit both the jihadist ideology working against it and the autocratic regimes that oppress their own populations and thus help breed radicalized strains Islam. In that way, recognizing Iraq as a central theatre puts McCain (and many others on the R side, at least) light years ahead of the D’s.

Regarding this sentence fragment from his article:

no central government — much less one run by Shiite fundamentalists

I’ve done 3 months of research on Iraqi politics. The Iraqi government, by most accounts on the ground, is run by a fractious coalition of Shias, Kurds and the odd Sunni and secularist, though being Shia-dominated. And to the extent the Shia dominated, most (but not all) of the ones in the positions of power are not anywhere close to fundamentalists. Don’t believe me? Women compose about 25% of the representation in Iraq’s parliament, and one of Maliki’s closest advisors is a woman. Doesn’t exactly sound likely in a government run by Islamic theocrats.

Was that the version you intended to link to? That version of the ad claims that the “only thing we have to fear is fear itself” and the Romney is “fearmongering” in order to get elected. There is no real threat from jihad, according to the ad. And that’s just nuts.

TX Mom on February 4, 2008 at 6:53 PM

I clicked the link. Sounds like Mitt is expressing Robert Spencer’s “Blogging the Koran”. You Juan McCain supporters gotta stop lying about Mitt. The only thing to fear is: Juan McCain.

How much is resolve worth without a winning strategy behind it? Says McCarthy, not much.

This is getting silly. Didn’t McCain speak out against Bush’s blind “resolve” in Iraq, and stand up as an early proponent of a change in the way that war was being fought? Well-placed resolve is worth a hell of a lot in wartime, and poorly-placed resolve can be suicidal. McCain’s claim is that he is not only steadfast on defense, but that he has been right as well. I understand that McCarthy’s new to this whole Romney thing, and is itching to get in the game, but he’ll have to do better than this to take the shine off McCain’s wartime credibility.

mred on February 4, 2008 at 6:46 PM

Was that the version you intended to link to? That version of the ad claims that the “only thing we have to fear is fear itself” and the Romney is “fearmongering” in order to get elected. There is no real threat from jihad, according to the ad. And that’s just nuts.