Quote of the day
posted at 10:55 pm on July 17, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
“Despite his public support for Bush after 9/11, McCain had deep misgivings about him as Commander in Chief. In March 2002, he and two other Senators were at the White House, briefing Condoleezza Rice, the National Security Adviser, about their recent meetings with European allies when Bush unexpectedly stuck his head in the door. ‘Are you all talking about Iraq?’ the President asked, his voice tinged with schoolyard bravado. Before McCain and the others in the room could do more than nod, Bush waved his hand dismissively. ‘F___ Saddam,’ he said. ‘We’re taking him out.’ And then he left.
McCain was appalled. He was a Republican, and a hawk, and exactly one year later he would enthusiastically support the decision to topple the Iraqi regime by force. But to McCain, his encounter with Bush that day was more evidence of the shallow intellect and dangerous self-regard possessed by the man to whom he had lost an acrimonious contest two years earlier. Later, McCain would retell the story and shake his head incredulously. ‘Can you believe this guy?’ he asked. ‘He’s the President!’ He didn’t say it, but the continuation of the thought hung in the air: Can you believe this guy is President — instead of me?”
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:
Hey! That’s just like John Kerry who said “I can’t believe I’m losing to this idiot’!”
You’ve made about a dozen people here very happy, Allahpundit!
Congrats!!!
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:00 PM
‘F___ Saddam,’ uuhhh no thanks.. I don’t go that way… w00T!
Chakra Hammer on July 17, 2008 at 11:00 PM
Darn. I totally missed that.
Well what do you know, a silver lining.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:05 PM
Too funny.
This from the man who says F— You! to other senators and sings, “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran”.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 11:09 PM
People’s feelings would change if someone were to say F____ Bush, we’re taking him out.
Riposte on July 17, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Kind of wish that Bush wold return.
Those on the left have been saying that for 7 years now.
WoosterOh on July 17, 2008 at 11:12 PM
Hey LOOK! The troll showed up – AGAIN!!!
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:13 PM
‘F___ Saddam,’ he said. ‘We’re taking him out.’
And had we not? What would’ve happened if we just did Afghanistan? It was a popular war, Bush could be a lot more popular than he is now, the Pubs could’ve gained seats in ‘06 instead of losing seats and a Pub could be ahead in the polls for Nov.
But on the other hand, we could have a Saddam with nuke, bio, chem or radiological weapons, contacts with a.q. and better relations with them because of 9/11 and a common goal of bringing down the U.S. and the Free World. They think they can, because they think they brought down the Soviet Union.
Could they have done it? Probably not, but they might have taken out a city in their attempt. Bush could’ve taken the popular route, but he didn’t, he did his job as CinC and has kept us safe by taking the war to the Middle East, to draw the jihadis into a battlefield of our choosing, far away from the U.S.
Who knows what’ll happen in the future? Maybe this has begun a chain of events that will bring about a long period of peace and security for us, and freedom and democracy for a billion people who’ve never known either.
Tony737 on July 17, 2008 at 11:14 PM
Eh, I like that sort of talk over Kerryesque droning or Obamanac blathering.
Bishop on July 17, 2008 at 11:14 PM
And that was just the beginning. Later Backdoor John would do his best to f*ck George Bush and his own party. Naturally, the best course of dealing with a politician that sides with the opposition frequently and trash talks his own base is to give him a promotion. Those who think this is an outrage and a mistake are called deranged. You know, sifting through John McCain’s record is like walking in a dog park at night with no shoes on; you’re going to step in a lot of things that you wish you’d never heard of, and the stench will follow you. Viva McCain, as another said earlier.
austinnelly on July 17, 2008 at 11:15 PM
People’s feelings would change if someone were to say F____ Bush, we’re taking him out.
Riposte on July 17, 2008 at 11:11 PM
Not on the left, they wouldn’t.
Bishop on July 17, 2008 at 11:18 PM
Hey LOOK! McVacuous showed up – AGAIN!!!
And still in a McFoul McMood because you haven’t, try as you might to say something worth it, got any McCain points yet. So sad.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 11:19 PM
Aren’t you on the wrong site? The place that is crawling with people like you who trash McCain is here.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:22 PM
I’ll see you your f**k Saddam and raise you 1 f**k Mahmoud!
redshirt on July 17, 2008 at 11:23 PM
McCain used to taunt the guards at the Hanoi Hilton using the same language, even though he knew it would cost him a beating or worse. He should embrace Bush’s flippancy.
Bishop on July 17, 2008 at 11:27 PM
I hope it’s true. Only the more of reason to support McCain.
freevillage on July 17, 2008 at 11:30 PM
You konw, Bishop, some times you just get tired of all the crap and say F*kit. Call these a*holes a*holes. What else are they going to do, kick you in the teeth? it’s like turning over a new leaf. very liberating.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:31 PM
You are of little mind and no memory.
McCain trashes himself. I just report.
You will probably be soon fired by Juan Hernandez for screwing up McCain’s blog talking points campaign.
You will probably be fortunate if the two Juans don’t send some LaRaza goons over to beat you even more senseless.
I would hide if I were in your zapatos.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 11:32 PM
no, really, MB4. You;d like the place. They say the EXACT SAME CRAP as you. you’d really like it.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:34 PM
Survey says….bite me!
Shouldn’t Mr.JAMES CARNEY be practicing with a popsicle stick so he can secure a 1 on 1 with Obama? TIMES a wastin’ dude!
dmann on July 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM
BTW, this continuation
is totally the reporter’s invention. It’s not automatic in any way. It’s indeed unbelievable quite in its own right that a poorly educated and little knowing moron has been elected President.
freevillage on July 17, 2008 at 11:35 PM
And it’s in Time Magazine, so you know it’s…spelled correctly.
jl on July 17, 2008 at 11:37 PM
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 11:38 PM
Hey dude! You jumped the gun! The election’s not until November and it’s not a sure thing that Obama will win.
jl on July 17, 2008 at 11:39 PM
“When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt. It’s going to be decisive.”
What’s the big deal with “F*** Saddam”? This is Bush — and it’s one of his more appealing traits.
Attila (Pillage Idiot) on July 17, 2008 at 11:41 PM
I personally think there’s no way Obama will win. And since I support McCain, I’m quite happy and relaxed.
freevillage on July 17, 2008 at 11:43 PM
lots of hearts and minds to be lost and won in the span of 4 months … you never know.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:45 PM
For all the hate that is out there for Bush, sometimes I wonder if things would’ve even been different if we had another president. Iraq is the major thing opponents of him have against him. However, getting rid of Saddam was a foreign policy goal even before Bush. So, who is to say if Gore won we wouldn’t have gone into Iraq? There’s a popular YouTube video of Bush in a debate with Gore saying that he doesn’t support nation building and Gore did. So part of me thinks the war in Iraq became so politicized and it just became to convenient to bash Bush for political reasons even by people who once supported the war.
I just hope next time we fight a war. We can stay above politics (both side of the aisle).
terryannonline on July 17, 2008 at 11:45 PM
You are so totally clueless that it is truly astounding.
Do you really think that Huffpo site that you linked to would like me criticizing McVain for his believing in fool Al’s Global Warming?
Do you think that they would like my criticizing McVain for giving employers who employ illegals a free pass?
For his getting together with Kennedy?
With his getting together with Feingold?
You are beyond clueless.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 11:46 PM
Then I guess we’ll never find out whether a “poorly educated and little knowing moron” can be elected president, huh?
jl on July 17, 2008 at 11:47 PM
Time magazine has it’s place.
Limerick on July 17, 2008 at 11:47 PM
Oh, the LOVE YOU! because you peddle the same crap that they do. ANd you both are after the same thing, a McCain loss this election. Really, you ought to be getting points from them.
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:47 PM
Todays libs only like wars when a DFL president starts them.
Bishop on July 17, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Very good point! Considering how much support the war in Iraq had from Democrats at the outset, and all them privy to the exact same intelligence as the President, it is not easy to conclude that a President Gore wouldn’t have gone into Iraq in the aftermath of 9/11. Particularly if he feared being labeled “weak” by the Republicans. It’s not as if liberal Democrats have never gotten us involved in wars before (e.g. WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam…)
jl on July 17, 2008 at 11:53 PM
sounds like a bs lib story
jp on July 17, 2008 at 11:53 PM
Absolutely!
With all we know now about Saddam’s ambitions… what if he was still in control of Iraq and the sanctions lifted because no WMD was found by the UN inspectors?
That was his ultimate plan.
To restart his WMD program once the sanctions were lifted and Chirac was going to make those sanctions disappear.
Texas Gal on July 17, 2008 at 11:55 PM
Hard to tell. Then again Arianna Huffington swears that McCain didn’t vote for Bush. And that alone should be reason enough not to vote for McCain!!!
wise_man on July 17, 2008 at 11:59 PM
They would not love me at all. I would probably be banned. You on the other hand – I think that they would like much about your beliefs.
Maybe I could get some points from them before they saw the full spread and then banned me.
You now though should not get any points from anyone as you just ain’t cutin’ it. You are an unchallenging waste of time.
MB4 on July 17, 2008 at 11:59 PM
The more I think about the more I’m certain Bush is gonna have the last laugh when he’s gone for a few years and we say, “Hey, that guy knew what he was doing after all”
Jim-Rose on July 18, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Don’t sell yourself short, mb4, you are doing aheackofajob helping to get obama voted in while in deep cover inside enemy territory. Keep bad mouthing McCain and fomenting revolt inside the republican party. The left’s ‘operation chaos’ is well alive with you.
wise_man on July 18, 2008 at 12:02 AM
Yeah. You must admit that ‘ol George probably laughed all the way back to Air Force One after he gave the ‘adios from the world’s biggest polluter’ line to the G8.
Gonna miss the mench.
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:04 AM
You vastly overestimate both my influence and you own sanity.
MB4 on July 18, 2008 at 12:05 AM
;(…..Lim strikes again….mensch
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:06 AM
Anybody who wasn’t saying F-ck Saddam after he gassed the Iraqi Kurds in 1988 had no humane concern or historical sense.
When he hanged the British journalist Farzad Bazoft in 1989- for looking too deeply into his WMD programs- I knew the maniac of Mesopotamia’s days were numbered.
If a Dem president had ousted him, it would have been a moment of moral clarity and strategic brilliance, but, since Chimpy McBushitler (who
beatstole the election from Gore) did it, it’s a warcrime and a shameful disaster and a blot on the international reputation on the U.S.Whether there is any truth to this reportage about McCain’s “thoughts”, or not, only McCain can answer.
It sounds like repackaged BDS to me.
A reporter needs to McCain, directly.
Meanwhile, the resurgent Taliban need someone to say F-ck you to them, soon.
And a malevolent dwarf named Mahmoud, too.
profitsbeard on July 18, 2008 at 12:08 AM
*yawn*
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:08 AM
Really? So like the fact that Whoopi Goldberg is a black racist is a mainstream view here is ok. But this is where they crossed the line.
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:11 AM
How ’bout this for a question: Do the Republicans would have made an issue of the war for political gain, if the war had turned unpopular under a Dem president?
terryannonline on July 18, 2008 at 12:12 AM
I believe that is a difference between us and them. There might have been political opposition to the build up, but once the boots hit the ground I seriously doubt we would have had Code Reds or MoveOvers.
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:16 AM
“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today”
-Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:24 AM
Do the Republicans would have made an issue of the war for political gain, if the war had turned unpopular under a Dem president?
When Klinton launched Operation Desert Fox, I said “It’s about time he did something right.” But I would not want him or Al Gore to invade any country for fear that they’d screw it up and retreat (making us look like a ‘paper tiger’) as they did in Somalia (which was going well under Daddy Bush). When Klinton got us involved in Yugoslavia I thought it was a three sided civil war that we should’ve stayed out of and a religious war that we were on the wrong side of. But, unlike the Lefties, we never cheered for the enemy so that we could use it against the President. Therefore, the answer to your question is no, but then again I can’t speak for all Pubs, there might’ve been one.
Tony737 on July 18, 2008 at 12:25 AM
“These international war criminals were led by Gen. Wesley Clark … who clicked his shiny heels for the commander-in-grief, Bill Clinton.”
-Michael Savage
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:28 AM
And how is that related to Code Pinko or MoveOn tripe? That is political opposition. Bosnia or Iraq, doesn’t matter. You didn’t find Reps calling people baby killers or Nazi.
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:28 AM
This is just too easy. People will seriously think you’re a set up. But anyway…
“This has been an unmitigated disaster … Ask the Chinese embassy. Ask all the people in Belgrade that we’ve killed. Ask the refugees that we’ve killed. Ask the people in nursing homes. Ask the people in hospitals.”
-Representative Joe Scarborough (R-FL)
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:31 AM
terryonline asked about elected Republicans, not Michael Savage. You didn’t find Delay inviting Savage to Senate hearings like you found Pelosi inviting Code Pinkos into the House gallery.
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:32 AM
You didn’t find Reps calling people baby killers or Nazi. – Limey
Damn right. We love the Troops, the libs either feel sorry for them, which is insulting, or they spit on them, knowing the professional Soldiers will not retaliate.
Hey Limey, where in Texas are you?
Tony737 on July 18, 2008 at 12:33 AM
Who lost his seat.
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:34 AM
Near DFW
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:34 AM
I’m sorry you’ve already been owned above. BTW, a curious analogy between Savage and Code Pinkos. I’m glad you find it appropriate. How many people here do you think agree with you?
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:35 AM
About Savage? Quite a few I suspect.
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:36 AM
This
1. is a lie.
2. would be irrelevant had it been true because here’s what your comment was
Which I did. In response anyone with a sense of basic decency or honor, would say something like “well, that was wrong, too”. But you have neither decency nor honor, nor of course any respect for your opponent in a debate.
Bye.
freevillage on July 18, 2008 at 12:40 AM
I’m sorry you’ve already been owned above. – Free
You’re kidding, right? You named one example of a Pub who never even said our Troops were like NaZis, Pol Pot, war criminals, and ‘we lost’ etc. Your side has a long list including still serving elected senators and congressmen, and they’re supported by hordes of America haters like Code Pink. Nice try, but no dice.
Tony737 on July 18, 2008 at 12:44 AM
LOL. Oh the shame of it all!
Limerick on July 18, 2008 at 12:46 AM
Hey Not-Wise Man, Free Village as well ……..
……… for you.
Seven Percent Solution on July 18, 2008 at 1:06 AM
F*** Saddam.
Mission accomplished President Bush.
Mojave Mark on July 18, 2008 at 1:20 AM
From the article:
emphasis mine
From what viewpoint is this being written?
Time magazine has gone from bad to worse.
hillbillyjim on July 18, 2008 at 1:23 AM
More loaded verbiage from the article:
hillbillyjim on July 18, 2008 at 1:43 AM
oops…..last 3 words mine….damn preview function doesn’t work when I don’t use it……
hillbillyjim on July 18, 2008 at 1:44 AM
“Profanity is misoverestimated. Hey John, I’m sorry, I should have said “Saddam is f**ked. We’ll fry him. Since when are you such a prude?”"
Entelechy on July 18, 2008 at 2:06 AM
I know of one. Me. Michael Savage is unhinged, or a false-flag show.
hillbillyjim on July 18, 2008 at 2:52 AM
Yeah, Johnnie Boy is such a delicate flower! :-0
hillbillyjim on July 18, 2008 at 2:56 AM
I know I don’t have to remind you about the dangers of arguing with a fool.
misterpeasea on July 18, 2008 at 3:44 AM
O. T.
Give’m hell, Michelle.
hillbillyjim on July 18, 2008 at 5:15 AM
mccain and time… if mccain somehow wins I’ll enjoy watching time magazine eviscerate him for the next 4 years. Talk about lying down with swine.
peacenprosperity on July 18, 2008 at 6:07 AM
I suspect Bush was planning to take out Saddam before he was even elected. So the theory goes….; 9/11 was just an event which provided the public support. The first Gulf War never ended. The US betrayed the Shia and Kurds by listening to the UN and not going all the way to Bahgdad in 1991. GW was going to rectify the mistake of his father anyway. It explains the ‘Let’s bring Democracy to a sectarian Arab state’ policy that is nowhere mentioned in the Congressional resolution authorizing the war. It also explains Bush’s intransigence on withdrawing and the ‘Surge’ that finally stablized the country. We owed it to the people of Iraq for screwing them over the first time around.
percysunshine on July 18, 2008 at 7:19 AM
That was the George Bush I voted for!
Grafted on July 18, 2008 at 7:46 AM
Ditto!
What would McCain have done, were he the President in ‘02? Pussyfooted around while Saddam thumbed his nose at the world and resumed his WMD development and hobnobbing with al Qaeda? I’m glad we had W in the Oval Office.
MrLynn on July 18, 2008 at 7:52 AM
Ok, this is getting ridiculous. I come to these boards to get honest information, and not party bullies. I don’t need personal flame wars and name calling.
Wise_man… you have changed these boards, and not in a positive way. McCain has a lot of faults, and I for one want and hope that he will change. But based on his past actions, I don’t trust him.
We have every right to hold our candidates to a higher standard, and demand better. I REFUSE to be a mindless cheerleader. I will make an informed decision. But your name calling and bullying have got to stop. This isn’t elementary school, and we are entitled to our opinions… and my vote is my vote. If you want to convince me to vote for McCain, then give me reasons… please. And leave Obama out of it. If McCain isn’t man enough to stand on his own conservative values, then he doesn’t deserve my vote.
But you need to stop the personal attacks and bullying.
dominigan on July 18, 2008 at 8:04 AM
hehehe…they just can’t let it go…this is really ridiculous, everyone just playing politics with the past…we deserve better than all of them
charlie36r on July 18, 2008 at 8:19 AM
You weren’t addressing me, but do you mind if I take a stab at it? I’m no big fan of McCain, but there really are some reasons why he’s a much better choice than Obama for a conservative voter. Here is one:
McCain for years has tried to stop the practice of earmarks — where Senators (and Congressmen) take billions of tax dollars for pet projects back to their home states/districts so that they can re-pay favors to their supporters and make themselves look “productive” to constitutents (thus buying themselves re-election). The practice of earmarking is a corrupt waste of taxpayer dollars and a custom-built (by the corrupt politicians themselves) method of insuring the incumbency of incompetent politicians. McCain has taken some political heat for his opposition to earmarks — his last Senate opponent ran commercials here in Arizona criticizing McCain for not “bringing home Arizona’s fair share” of pork — but McCain has continued his opposition to the practice of earmarks because he believes that it is fiscally irresponsible and bad for the country.
(I know you said leave Obama out of it, but if you don’t know his record on this issue, how can you know if McCain is the better choice?). Obama, the man who campaigns against corrupt “politics as usual” and says he’ll help clean up the system, is a big supporter/user of earmarks. In his few years in the Senate, he has taken tens of millions of dollars in earmarks for his home state of Illinois — and as his current list of earmark requests shows, he has no intention of stopping this practice.
AZCoyote on July 18, 2008 at 8:49 AM
“Leave Obama out of it”? What?!
If Obambi is the nominee (and I’m still not 100% convinced he will be) then the first priority has to be stopping him from winning the election. If that means voting for someone you don’t like, that’s what you have to do. We can’t let the country fall into the hands of the radical Communists, Islamists, Black Liberation cadres, and various useful idiots who are behind this Manchurian Candidate. Do you want to see Bill Ayers in the Cabinet? Wesley Clark as Secretary of Defense? Hillary Clinton on the Supreme Court?
I agree with you about the personal attacks on this board—these threads take too much time to read as it is, without wasting it reading two or three fools insulting each other.
MrLynn on July 18, 2008 at 9:04 AM
And, we’re supposed to have a problem with this because…?
CP on July 18, 2008 at 9:32 AM
Get over yourself, man.
a) the people who support McCain are not on the payroll.
b)Juan Hernandez has nothing to do with the McCain Blog camapaign.
c)You do act very Red Pill-ish sometimes. So forgive us for thinking you to be a bit Troll-like.
Squid Shark on July 18, 2008 at 10:28 AM
I am not.
Squid Shark on July 18, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Hey McMaverick, according to what happened to Saddamm looks to me like you better hope Bush doesn’t say F… McCain
Now head on over to McDonalds and stuff something in your mouth before you blow your last foot off. SHUT UP!
dhunter on July 18, 2008 at 11:03 AM
The article this comes from is so typical of the MSM point of view.
Bush avoiding the war by the Air Guard — check
Bush getting the mythical “coveted spot” in the Guard –check
Bush as a lightweight — check
Bush as shallow intellect — check
Republican — but not Democrat? — “dirty tricks” — check
And of course, the perennial favorite: Bush as poison — check
For all Bush’s storied low approval rating, he could easily beat both Obama and McCain in 2008 if he were actually eligible to run. But the MSM still hasn’t figured out how he ever won in the first place.
theregoestheneighborhood on July 18, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Comment pages: