Team McCain: Immigration statement poorly worded
posted at 12:45 pm on May 23, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Jim Geraghty reached out to the John McCain campaign to ask them …. well, to ask them what the hell John McCain was thinking yesterday. Instead of dancing around it, Geraghty’s source acknowledged the damage done by the statement, but insisted it was just an example of poor wording. Their commitment to border security first has not changed, they said:
I doubt this will mitigate the anger of bloggers like John Hawkins much, but Team McCain tells me there’s been no change in his stance on immigration — secure the border first, deal with other aspects of illegal immigration once the border is secure. Recently, McCain made comments that seemed to suggest he was eager to get to the second part, which conservatives and border security types are understandably wary about. ….
Team McCain tells me the senator’s comments were poorly worded. There’s been no discussion within the campaign of altering their stance on illegal immigration, and as far as everyone on the campaign is concerned, the policy is still, ’secure the border first.’
If so, then Senator McCain needs to make a rather high-profile attempt to clear up the confusion. I didn’t think he had departed from his previous positions, but clearly that was the impression that was left with people, and not necessarily unreasonably so.
It’s admirable that they acknowledged the mistake, but McCain needs to perform better now that he’s won the nomination, especially on this hot-button issue. He has to know that a large number of conservatives mistrust him on this specific issue, and that anything said on the trail about immigration will get very close scrutiny. He can’t afford missteps like this.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »
So we’re the NVA in McCain’s world? Sounds about right.
doubleplusundead on May 23, 2008 at 3:53 PM
Well, MB4, I can just imagine an Iranian-backed Mahdist militia rampaging in the American Southwest, while they send heavy weapons over the border to them, line I-10 with EFPs, and prepare to smuggle the fissives with which to mushroom our metropoli.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 3:54 PM
Actually your case is even better as the last I heard on Obama’s web site he calls for a withdrawal over a time frame of 16 months which would presumably not start until at least February of 2009 and if the Joint Chiefs said they needed a little more time I would think that Obama would have at least some flexibility.
According to Michael Yon, progress in Iraq is now so good that it is unbelievable, so all that should be more than enough time for the Iraqi army to be up to speed and then some.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 3:54 PM
.
If that is your argument, you have not only lost me, but pretty much everyone.
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 3:56 PM
That’s it….time to start dinner…
Crow a’la HotAir.
Later.
Limerick on May 23, 2008 at 3:56 PM
Right. So he is going to immediately end the Iraq war and usher in socialised medicine and all the rest, but, he won’t be in any rush. You need to get your different stories straight.
From what I can see it is only “true conservatives” who are willing to oppose his polices. The liberal Reps will smile cheerfully if McCain implements them.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Okay, so they dance for a few days.
Meanwhile for the next 16 months (which is how long he said he’d take to have them all out), what happens is what was going to happen anyhow. And it still happens very publicly which makes it really tough to ignore. And the stronger Iraqi government, gets even more outspoken about its neighbor to the north that’s been fighting a very underreported war agaisnt it for five or six years.
And we still have troops there when it’s all done.
You forget that Obama’s already confessed that we will still have troops in Iraq, no matter what. He won’t remove all the troops anyhow. Samantha Power already let that cat out of the bag, remember? He wouldn’t even promise to have the troops out by 2013.
Jimmie on May 23, 2008 at 3:57 PM
Given the recent showing from American citizen registered voters and taxpayers, so far as getting re-elected IT WOULDN’T TAKE ANY BRAVERY from members of Congress of either party to do their job of politicking with each other to get the votes needed to force a vote on Shuler’s bill. You are right, it would make whoever accomplished that a very popular politician at home. Garnering the votes would either make or break a politician on the Hill given the power of the Machine that runs our world; hence their hesitation to speak above a whisper. That, plus they are all a bunch of self satisfied lazy bastards.
maverick muse on May 23, 2008 at 3:58 PM
Well, you anyway. But it’s not like you were ever willing to listen. Perhaps you can point to all the immigrant groups which have made America more conservative.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:00 PM
Speculate away.
I’m gambling too. I would prefer that you gamble with our adversarial brothers rather than allow us to be divided and conquered.
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 4:01 PM
We cannot begin to impose our own wishful thinking dream timetable – the selfsame thing we have excoriated the Dems for trying to force – so we can claim that withholding our votes from McCain out of visceral animus and thus allowing Obama to win and carry through with his plans for the swiftest withdrawal he can force might not be ‘all that bad’ for Iraq; we will know what the conditions on the ground will be in 2009 when 2009 arrives, and not before. With McCain, what those conditions are will matter; with Obama, they will not.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:02 PM
And just where do you imagine that U.S. Army Artillery, Armor and Infantry would be while all this mayhem was going on?
How about the U.S. Marines?
How about the U.S. Air Force.
Maybe you imagine that they would all be in the center of the universe known as Iraq.
Oh yee of so very little faith.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:03 PM
MCCAIN ‘08: JUST SHUT UP AND VOTE FOR HIM, YOU RACIST!
misterpeasea on May 23, 2008 at 4:03 PM
.
Everybody in this country immigrated here – it was an empty country! Or, are you just suggesting that we have the ‘right’ mix now, so shut the doors before some more of those Italians, or Mexicans, or swarthy Hungarians get in?
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 4:03 PM
Actually, the Cubans are pretty consistent conservatives, all in all.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:04 PM
Considering that the war is in the hands of Congress, not the President, what difference will it make whether McCain or Obama is elected as far as Iraq goes?
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:04 PM
#uck Islamic Iraq.
#uck Juan Plantation McStawberries.
Long live America!!!
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Well, it would be the first time we had fought a war within our own borders since 1812 (that one didn’t go too well); I’d much prefer we fight other countries where THEY are, and not where WE are.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM
You go ahead and blame whatever scapegoat or boogeyman you want to blame, buddy.
wise_man on May 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Yes, but apportionment does not happen until some 3 years after the census. The last re-apportionment was in 2003. Besides, that’s only half of the equation. The redistricting is where most of the real power-brokering happens, and that’s controlled by the individual states.
spmat on May 23, 2008 at 4:07 PM
I agree with you. Importing 12-20+ poor, uneducated illegals and their families sounds like a good way to a permanent
DemocratSocialist majority. They have a long and proud tradition of socialism in Central and South America.But aren’t the Cubans pretty conservative? I guess fleeing from a communist thug who nationalized…everything will do it.
misterpeasea on May 23, 2008 at 4:07 PM
Because Obama will be pushing for speedy withdrawal, as per his campaign pledge, while McCain would be pushing to finish the job. The difference is substantial, with the bully pulpit, Blue Dog dems, veto power, and reallocation of funds.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:08 PM
It’s not now.
No. But I am saying that immigration makes America more left wing, and that “right wingers” who love immigration are confused at best.
I notice that you didn’t even respond to my point about Hispanic voting patterns.
Yes please.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:09 PM
Please don’t take up valuable comment space ignoring the difference between legal and illegal immigration.
Everyone is wise to that crap by now.
misterpeasea on May 23, 2008 at 4:10 PM
They are. And Hispanics from outside Cuba are pretty left-wing. This isn’t even open to debate, the numbers are clear.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Freedom is an integral part of our culture and shouldn’t be separated from it in order to further your argument. The question is, why do we have it and they don’t? It’s because our culture is superior in totality, which isn’t to suggest we don’t have our faults. Our culture gave birth and nurtured our founding fathers. Our culture allied with other 1st world cultures to defeat Hitler, and it was primarily through our own efforts that we defeated the U.S.S.R. We landed on the moon and have explored the surface of Mars. That wasn’t an accident of our culture, it was a product of it.
Cultural-relativism is bunk. America’s culture, created by all of it’s diverse members, is superior to the cultures of Central and South America.
FloatingRock on May 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM
McCain’s been practicing divide and conquer against the GOP and conservatism in general for the past 8 years, so you can cool it with the righteous indignation there, chief. He’s made his whole career by being disloyal to the party and especially to conservatives. The only reason why he’s even viable in ‘08 is because of 8 years of playing footsie with the MSM and the Democrats by stabbing us in the back, time after time, on a whole host of issues.
spmat on May 23, 2008 at 4:12 PM
They would be destroyed in short order.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:12 PM
.
To your point on Hispanic voting patterns; they were moving steadily to the right, until the anti-amnesty forces were charged (I thought unfairly) with racism.
.
To your response on my shutting the door question – I guess I was naive to think the racism charge was unfair.
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 4:13 PM
There’s not two different stories there. He’s going to immediately end the war in iraq, appoint liberal judges, and start to socialize medicine (dude, that’s his platform!!!!), and there will be some latency in the negative effects. Enough latency that we’re likely to give him another 4 years to screw things up. Who’s going to stop him? 4 years from now, Republicans have to beat an incumbent, widely hailed for ending the war in Iraq (for Americans, anyway)-
Who’s your man? You’re awfully confident things will turn around for Republicans, you better at least have someone ready to fight in 4 years (since you’re not willing to fight now).
RightOFLeft on May 23, 2008 at 4:13 PM
1) There are no “Blue Dogs” in the Senate.
2) The veto does no apply. All Congress has to do is NOT allocate funds.
3) You cannot “reallocate” funds that Congress does not give in the first place.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:14 PM
.
Why don’t you read the relevant posts before making ignorant comments?
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 4:14 PM
If it was up to me, I’d build the fence, while passing a law that made it business suicide to employ illegals. Most of them would then self-deport, since their economic incentive woulod be removed once they could no longer find jobs, and the rest could be rounded up and deported. If we needed workers on this side of the border, they could be admitted on a temporary work visa with clearly and indelibly stamped dates, after being vetted to weed out folks with criminal histories and terrorist ties. A reasonable nomber would be allowed to apply for immigration leading to citizenship, provided they learn english and pass a citizenship test. Everyone would have to stand in line.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:15 PM
You’re embarrassing.
misterpeasea on May 23, 2008 at 4:16 PM
So he will “immediately” end the war in Iraq, but the negative effects won’t be obvious for several years?
And when the Clintons tried to socialize medicine, the result was the first GOP House majority in forty years. Shouldn’t we be hoping he tries to do that?
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:17 PM
.
Good. Why don’t you leave, then?
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 4:17 PM
Go to this link and then scroll to the top for still more of
McCain’s back stabbing
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:20 PM
You can reallocate funds from other parts of the Armed services to concentrate your assets. There are indeed Blue Dogs around; the democratic Party had to run some more conservative types in order to obtain their numbers. And Lieberman is a Blue Dog on the GWOT.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:20 PM
I’ll assume you are merely ignorant, and not lying. Hispanics have been voting Democratic for many decades now. Even when Reagan was sweeping to huge victories in every state, he was losing the Hispanic vote by about two to one.
Ahh, the old adage remains true. A racist is a conservative winning an argument with a liberal.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:20 PM
spmat on May 23, 2008 at 4:12 PM
You’re wasting your breath with me on this point.
I agree with you. I am so pissed at McCain, I can’t see straight.
I disagree that gambling on Obama in the White House is some sort of great political strategy.
I’m not that type of gambler. Like I said before on another post:
Life, business, politics and war…
“One in the hand is worth two in the bush“
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 4:23 PM
That assumes that there are billions of dollars of spare money floating around the DoD. If its true, we need to cut its funding.
The only thing keeping the Dems from pulling the plug on the war right now is that they have such a tiny majority, and that majority consists of Lieberman. If they pick up half a dozen Senate seats this year as seems likely then the war is over. Get used to it.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:24 PM
That is indeed the key as now the vast majority of illegal serf employing “businesses” get off scot free. Of course I guess they
pay a lot of bribesmake a lot of campaign contributionsMB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:24 PM
MB4, we would most probably defeat them in short order; I’d just prefer the collateral damage by us and the intentional damage by them upon civilians not to be upon American civilians in the Southwest.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:25 PM
The permanent US installation base in Iraq necessary for us to counter Iran in the near future will occur with McCain.
Obama will pull the plug out of that lifeboat we’ve created and stabalized for the West yet to formalize in Iraq.
Iraq is so many more things to America than what we concentrate upon.
War for oil? Yes and no. Yes for the immediate NOW; nice to have a supply available. No for the long term as soon as we begin drilling/refining our own domestic supply.
War for democracy? Yes and no. We were not upset by the Shah of Iran, and so many other dictators that we supported. But the 21st Century is a world apart from 1960. The earlier attempt to establish a Mideastern democracy in Pakhistan has yet to stabilize. Mideastern Muslim Democracy will always be its own can of worms. But it will be no worse than an anti-USA dictatorship. And as a democracy gives MORE Iraqi’s involvement in their national decision making, the US will always have a better chance to staying allied with Iraq as a democracy than either as an Islamofascist theocracy or another Dictatorship series of coups.
War to depose Hussein, himself the threat? YES. The time bomb Hussein had to go.
War for our national security vs. terrorism? YES.
First War to begin countering the Iranian threat? YES.
maverick muse on May 23, 2008 at 4:25 PM
(1) yes. think carefully on the meaning of the word obvious.
(2) post hoc ergo propter hoc. if only history were that simple.
RightOFLeft on May 23, 2008 at 4:25 PM
.
Look up the relevant figures. Hispanics had been voting in greater percentages for republicans in every recent election until 2006. I didn’t say they voted in majority that way, but you kill the pattern when you move from an economic argument to an ethnic one. When somebody says we have the right mixture of ethnic groups, so shut the doors, I call that racism. Your smarmy comment about me is a joke – you would’nt say it to my face, you shouldn’t say it here. Last person to call me a liberal in person lost a tooth.
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 4:26 PM
Actually, they would have to pick up ten seats in the Senate to invoke cloture and avoid a filibuster, and 17 seats to override a Presidential veto.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:26 PM
What makes you think that the Democratic Congess will agree with that?
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:27 PM
I certainly didn’t mean any disrespect. I must have overlooked my tone. I apologize.
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Liberal is as liberal does, tough guy. I love Internet Tough Guys.
misterpeasea on May 23, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Probably not too my people looked at my link so I will post just one of the comments to the story there.
John “me first” McCain can be trusted – in the same way any megalomaniac can be trusted, to do whatever he thinks on the spur of the moment will help John McCain. Got bribes in exchange for slaves and refusal to enforce the illegal employment laws, or cute blonde lobbyists for him? McCain automatically thinks “great, something for me and I’m entitled to it because I’m john McCain who’se daddy and granddaddy were Admirals”.
McCain is a megalomaniac rebranded as a “maverick”. If you are a “maverick” you can yell obcenities at other GOP members of Congress who disagree with your amnesty legislation. You can lie to your constituents, and you don’t even think it is lying. You can take bribes from Keating’s 5 and communications and agribusiness, and be outraged when questioned about it.
The same is true of a megalomaniac. And it explains MCain’s behavior more accurately
Comment by JAM
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:29 PM
I’m hoping that the mutual defence pact is completed and signed before Dubya leaves office (it doesn’t require congressional approval); then, if McCain doesn’t make it in, Obama would then have to suffer the embarrassment of abrogating it with a friendly government.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:29 PM
Argg! What is it with you people?
There is no presidential veto to override. Get that through your heads, please. All Congress has to do is not pass a bill funding the war. There will be nothing any President can do about it.
The ONLY reason the war is being funded at present is because Lieberman has the whole Senate by the, umm, sensitive parts. Come next year he’ll be just one more Senator.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:31 PM
.
Well, I like girls, so stay away from me.
Think_b4_speaking on May 23, 2008 at 4:31 PM
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Don’t forget the beating we gave Mexican revolutionaries along the SW border. Pancho Villa repeatedly raided US Territory. We have precedence to enforce our border security with our national guard and military!
maverick muse on May 23, 2008 at 4:33 PM
This hypothetical was interesting but let’s not forget that it was just a game as even the Vulcans can not switch places between Iran and Mexico.
Meanwhile back to reality – there are probably 20,000,000 illegal invaders in America killing more Americans per year than were killed on 9/11.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:33 PM
No need to argue with the spin from McCain shills. Just let them continue to copy/paste their tired rhetoric without debate:
1) He’s better than Obama
2) He’s good on the war
3) He’s better than Obama
4) Anyone that doesn’t vote for him wants Obama to win.
5) He’s better than Obama
nottakingsides on May 23, 2008 at 4:35 PM
I can conceive of McCain making a national televised speech, or even a series of them, complete with maps and charts and video displays, explaining how well we’re doing in Iraq, and why we need to remain there just a bit longer to finish the job, and bringing out Petraeus and Odierno to testify that what he has said is factually correct, and Maliki to join him in his appeal. Going over the heads of Congress and submitting them to pressure from their own constituencies can be an effective tactic.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:36 PM
Notice that it takes 20 million of them to kill more in a year than 20 jihadis killed in a day.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:37 PM
No, they had not. Reagan received a share of the Hispanic vote in 1984 comperable to what Bush received in 2004. You don’t know what you are talking about. They had NOT been voting for Republicans in ever greater percentages until 2006. Their 40% for Bush was the same as they gave Reagan 22 years earlier.
The only person I see here making an ethnic argument is you.
Which comment are you refering to? In any case I’m pretty sure you would not call me a racist to my face, Mr Macho.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Amen.
maverick muse on May 23, 2008 at 4:38 PM
Hmmmm…it sounds as though nottakingsides has taken a side; Obama’s.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:38 PM
I’m sure the dead find that to be a great comfort.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:39 PM
I’m sure the many more dead if vengeful Iraqis came over here and did more of the 9-11 same because we abandoned and betrayed them twice in two years would find it equally comforting.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Umm…twice in two generations…
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Assuming Obama wins in November, he won’t become President until January. That’s 8 months from now. On his web site (at least the last I heard) he says he will withdraw over a period of 16 months. So that’s a minimum of 24 months from now. A whole lot longer than “just a bit longer”. And if progress is half as unbelievable as Michael Yon says, that should be way more than enough time.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:43 PM
I’m amazed at how quickly the conversation changes with business owners that agree that illegal immigration needs to be stopped, when I bring up how simple we can end the border problem if we would require mandatory verification of social security numbers. (I am a business owner btw)
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 4:43 PM
Whatever floats your boat, but don’t let the cops catch you.
I prefer women myself, Tough Guy.
misterpeasea on May 23, 2008 at 4:43 PM
Let me see if understand you.
You are saying that if we leave Iraq in 2008, after invading in 2003 and freeing them from Saddam, then the Iraqis will come here to America and kill us as payment?
You’re not persuading me that we ought to continue to expend vast amounts of money helping these people. But it DOES seem like better immigration enforcement would be a great idea.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:45 PM
I’m over-sensitive anyway. Cheers to ya.
spmat on May 23, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Can you explain why business owners have blocked and contine to block laws which would require verification of social security numbers?
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:47 PM
We liberated them from Saddam. They owe us. Big Time. Oh, and how do they repay us? By having a U.S. Army General grovel before them because an American soldier “disrespected” their evil koran and then they even said that was not enough.
#uck em.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:47 PM
I hope so, MB4, for our sakes, and for theirs, but one can never take anything for granted in warfare. It’s over when it’s over, not before, and you are never sure in advance when that will be. I would much prefer for the timeline to flow from the ground conditions than to be imposed upon it.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:47 PM
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:47 PM
Beats me, it certainly is a lot less expensive than more security and a thousand miles of physical wall.
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 4:49 PM
I’ve made this point to flenser before, but i guess he has a short memory, so I’ll have to make it agian:
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/05/23/team-mccain-immigration-statement-poorly-worded/comment-page-2/#comment-1144336
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:50 PM
That’s not what I’m saying….
I’m a hawk on the war on terror. If I were president after 9/11 I would have nuked Tora Bora. I would have laid down the law to terrorist supporting nations. I would have seized the oil fields of Saudi Arabia denying them the ability to continue funding terrorism and ending their veto on the WOT. I would have pissed the worlds Islamists off so badly, whipping the Islamic street into a frenzy, and then I would have laid waste to their streets. Rinse and repeat.
I’m all for the WOT, in fact I want to win it in 5 years, not in 500 years… if at all.
But if we’re going to allow the terrorists to eventually sneak WMD’s into our country and secret them away in our cities while stirring the hive we are playing a dangerous game. If we’re not going to defend ourselves here at home we should be kissing Islamist butt overseas. That’s probably why we’re taking the long road in the WOT, so that we can leave our borders wide open to appease the various open-borders interests. Sure, we’re pissing people off slightly, but our government is trying to balance the game with a cost/benefit analysis of the risk. OK, fine, but it’s still a risk that many experts feel will eventually come to fruition.
On with the war… faster… and border security is an integral aspect which can’t be surrendered.
What I’m saying is that none of the current candidates are remotely qualified to be president.
FloatingRock on May 23, 2008 at 4:50 PM
I saw it before. In this scenario, who are the Chinese and Russians? I think it’s an inexact analogy.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:55 PM
To add to what FloatingRock said above on May 23, 2008 at 4:11 PM:
This republic we have in these United States of America providentially came into being through the efforts of Englishmen living in the New World. Without the unique British heritage of hundreds of years of hammering out the curtailment of the power of kings, the rights of men, and the rule of law through words and revolutions (the Charter of Liberties, the Magna Carta, Oliver Cromwell, Lex Rex, John Locke, the Glorious Revolution, William Blackstone, etc.) we would have had no free Englishmen ready for the American Revolution. Our republic came from the hearts and minds of men who had thought long and debated hard about law, liberty and government.
INC on May 23, 2008 at 4:56 PM
What I’m saying is that none of the current candidates are remotely qualified to be president.
FloatingRock on May 23, 2008 at 4:50 PM
I agree. Personally, I think this whole election is about international interests usurping the power of the executive, through the conduit of the Senate.
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 4:56 PM
MB4, we are only now paying back the Iraqis a blood debt of honor we have owed them since Gulf War I, when Bush Sr. called them to rebel against Saddam and they did in 14 of 18 provinces, only to have us cut them off at the knees by, instead of supporting their answering of our President’s call, letting Saddam’s tanks return from Kuwait and slaughter hundreds of thousands of them.
If we leave too early now, and everything hits the genocidal massacre fan there, it will be our second betrayal of them in as many generations; there are no words for how shameful such an act would be.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 4:57 PM
OK, then look at it this way. Since 9/10/2001 3,000 Americans killed by islamos. If you count, as I would, the Americans killed in Iraq that would be another 4,000. So depending on how you look at it since 9/10/2001 either 3,000 or 7,000. Of course if American troops had not been in Iraq the islamos could not very well have killed them.
The best estimates that I have been able to find for the number of Americans killed by illegal invaders (murder, drunk driving, etc.) is about 4,000 a year. So since 9/10/2001 about 27,000. Then of course there are all the rapes and assaults.
MB4 on May 23, 2008 at 4:58 PM
I find this weird. The South Vietnamese did not come to America and blow us up for abandoning them. Why will the Iraqis? And if they are that sort of people, why are we helping them in the first place?
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 4:59 PM
Umm…the Iranians and Al Qaeda are the contemporary equivalents. A different level of arms, to be sure, but then again, it’s a different kind of war. The abandonment and betrayal remain the same.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:00 PM
Salamantis, you are big on shame and honor as it applies to US conduct abroad. I wish we could worry a bit more about the shameful and dishonorable conduct of the US government as it applies to America and Americans.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM
INC on May 23, 2008 at 4:56 PM
And this is why it is so critically important for immigrants to be educated on the history of the US and its cultural underpinnings.
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM
They would because Al Qaeda would move back into Anbar, nurse their bitterness and grieving at friends and family lost, and use it to recruit them. There was no equivalent enabler in Vietnam.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM
|I like to think that our country’s word means something; that we stand for freedom for those abroad who desire it, and that we treat people who trust us with everything with a modicum of human decency. Perhaps I am wrong; perhaps Americans aren’t as fundamentally good as I believe them to be.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:04 PM
Let’s be serious here. Iran and Al Queda pose no serious threat to the United States comparable to that of communist China and Russia.
It’s not our job to make the world a wonderful place, and we can’t even if we want to. There has to be SOME exit from the Middle East, and it can’t be at the point where everybody there loves each other.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM
I agree. Assimilation is the word.
Thomas Paine said:
INC on May 23, 2008 at 5:08 PM
Well, MB4, we have spent much blood and treasure and a great amount of resources interdicting dozens of subsequent attacks. Had we not done so, I am quite certain that our terror casualties would be much more formidable.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:08 PM
Al Queda are the people killing them. According to you, they will react not by attacking Al Queda, but us.
You seem to think that only Americans must live up to your code of honor. Iraqis can be as ungrateful as they like.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 5:08 PM
Messed up the block quote. :-(
This is my comment on Paine, not a continuation of what he said:
It’s not enough just to want to be “free”. You have to inculcate the principle of liberty for freedom to continue.
INC on May 23, 2008 at 5:09 PM
No Soviets, Chinese or North Vietnamese were offering Viets training, arming, funding, and covert passage to the US with learned and planned terror plots in place. Al Qaeda’s MO is precisely that.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Careful, there are people who’ll call you a racist for talking about culture.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Checkmate.
Holmes on May 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM
They should be grateful, after their fathers and mothers died when we betrayed and abandoned them at the end of Gulf War I, if their sisters and brothers die because we betray and abandon them again?
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:11 PM
I know that if that happened to my family, I’d be asking for C4 and an airplane ticket.
Salamantis on May 23, 2008 at 5:12 PM
Salamantis, you are big on shame and honor as it applies to US conduct abroad. I wish we could worry a bit more about the shameful and dishonorable conduct of the US government as it applies to America and Americans.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 5:02 PM
I know I shouldn’t get into the middle of this, but…oh well.
When we’re discussing presidential elections, it seems to me that US conduct abroad is paramount to the discussion. After all, international relations is, originally anyway, the primary purpose for the federal executive.
I think farm subsidies and educational standards (etc), have no place in presidential politics.
Saltysam on May 23, 2008 at 5:12 PM
K…I’m back from the ovens. Have we all come together and formed a plan?
Limerick on May 23, 2008 at 5:14 PM
You know, if this worries you so much, I’d think that you’d be MUCH more concerned with border security than you seem to be. I don’t care if people on the other side of the world want to kill me. I care if they are able to get here and do it.
The whole “all out committemnt to fighting in the Middle East, no interest in border security” wing of the GOP just amazes me. If Islamic terror was my biggest concern I’d be even more adamant about border security. But you guys don’t seem to care at all.
flenser on May 23, 2008 at 5:14 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next »