Kondracke on whether "political hero" McCain's war stance will "help" his campaign: "Boy, I hope so"
On the April 14 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys, co-host and Roll Call executive editor Morton M. Kondracke proclaimed that "John McCain was a war hero, and he's my idea of a political hero," explaining that McCain said in his April 11 speech to the Virginia Military Institute "that he'd rather lose a campaign than lose a war." Kondracke added: "And he said, 'If you think that the enemy wouldn't kill American kids, you're crazy.' And, you know -- and that is the lesson that Americans ought to take. They are going to come after us wherever we are, and they'll kill our kids as well." When asked by co-host and Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes, "Is this going to help the McCain campaign?" Kondracke responded: "Boy, I hope so."
As Media Matters for America has noted, according to a March 18 Washington Post article, "U.S. intelligence officials and outside experts" have said that unlike Osama bin Laden, Al Qaeda in Iraq "poses little danger to the security of the U.S. homeland."
From the April 14 edition of Fox News' The Beltway Boys:
KONDRACKE: I mean, John McCain was a war hero, and he's my idea of a political hero. I mean, he said in this speech that he'd rather lose a campaign than lose a war. I don't know whether that's going to happen.
And just as another example of political courage, here he is trying to woo conservatives, and he voted against the Bush line on stem cells. That's another example of political courage.
Now he had another item in that speech where he talked about this chilling event where a car gets driven up to a checkpoint in Iraq, and the car was let through because there were two little kids sitting in the backseat. Car drives into a market. The driver gets out, leaves the kids in the backseat, and then blows it up in the middle of the market.
And he said, "If you think that the enemy wouldn't kill American kids, you're crazy." And, you know -- and that is the lesson that Americans ought to take. They are going to come after us wherever we are, and they'll kill our kids as well.
BARNES: I'll ask you the question: Is this going to help the McCain campaign?
KONDRACKE: Boy, I hope so.
BARNES: That was a -- that was a -- all right. Let me move on.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Jeeze. Why would anyone want to kill Americans? Could it be their obsession with invading countries for no good reason and killing anyone who is in their way?Nah they must just be jealous
Especial with that warmonger Bush as president.
Can wait until Obama is running things.
Who? "I Love Israel" Obama? A man who supports the Dem bill to fund the war crime until the next election and the planned "redeployment" version of continued occupation ? A corporate establishment politician who thinks we must threaten Iran for his masters at AIPAC? Oh yeah, he'll just change everything.
New to US politics, aren't ya?
Boy I hope so
What a fool, if McCain and his warmonger supporters had their way we would be in Iraq forever and 20 year old Americans would die every day not to mention the hundreds of Iraqis who die also. McCain is worse than Bush and Kondracke is a fool and a partisan hack.
McCain doesn't want to be in Iraq. He just wants to woo the right wingers, to gather that solid 30% that would rather drown in the engine room than abandon ship. That's his ticket to win the primaries. Notice how his position on all policies suddenly matches Bush's stance. McCain is a prisoner of the GOP, and has been exhibiting Stockholm syndrome for the past couple months. The "straight talk express" can accurately still be called that because it expresses talking points straight from the White House.
Thanks to the Bush team, haven't they already killed over 3300 of our kids in Iraq?
"They are going to come after us wherever we are"
What is it about Conservatives that makes this a "convincing" argument for staying in Iraq? Are they that stupid? I've heard this ridiculous talking point over and over, yet, nobody who regurgitates it bothers to explain how our staying in Iraq keeps the terrorists from coming over here.
Anyone? Anyone?
There are terrorists in this country right now. Would you agree?
I can't wait to see where this is going.
More "FEAR FEAR FEAR!!" from the right wing punditry. Personally, I'm more scared of being hit by a drunk driver and lightning at the same time while crossing the street than being killed by "terrists".
There probably are. What does that have to do with Iraq? If terrorists have the means with which to attack our target rich environment, they are going to do it no matter what we do in Iraq. This notion that the terrorists will follow us over here if we pull out of Iraq is nothing more than a lame GOP talking point. Do the terroristst not know the way already? Are they going to stow away on a troop ship, or hide on top of an M-1 Abrams turret? Please.
I agree that Iraq was a mistake. However, that has occurred. Some on the left claim that our involvement in Iraq has created more terrorists, perhaps true. However, some on the left also agree that we were right in going into Afghanistan because Bin Laden was there and he was responsible for 9-11 if you don't believe the conspiracy idiots (and that's really being too kind). So, I also think that going into Afghanistan created more terrorists even though I guess that's okay because the left endorsed that move.
Bottom line, there will always be terrorists. We will prevent some terrorism and we will not prevent some terrorism. I don't see that changing no matter what we do.
Hopefully we will prevent more than we don't prevent, and what we don't prevent will not approach the devastation that was 9-11. I think we're still in Iraq because we can't figure out how to get out without having a lot more people die than are currently dying. That's what I think.
You have a point Bruce, but...
If our government REALLY wanted to protect our country from terrorists, we would see much different moves than we are now. Our borders and ports should be protected. We should have people of higher education levels as security personal in airports, our nuclear facilities should be better protected, but unfortunately the Bush Administration has ignored all this and has decided to further allow our brave men and women to die NEEDLESSLY in Iraq. Change is needed and I CAN NOT wait till Bush is gone...
I had to pinch myself to be certain I was not dreaming - but I agree with you. The measures you endorse make more sense than crippling our country chasing phantasms across Iraq; and I share the concern you express as to how to get out, while hoping to mitigate the consequences of having gone in.
Do we by any chance share as well, the perception that we must break up the Corporate Media Oligopoly, if not corporations per se, and try to steer toward the result of media that serve the people, rather than the current crop of self-serving Corporate liars? If so, there is plenty of room on the MORA bandwagon! I'm sure you have seen this link enough times that I needn't repeat the boilerplate about telling your congresspeople how you feel, and that I am very OK with removing the Fairness Doctrine.
Well, the difference in Afghanistan is that we were able to trace the source of the 9-11 attacks directly there, or so we've been told. Interestingly, there was much more of a connection between 9-11 and Saudi Arabia than 9-11 and Iraq, but we invaded Iraq....why?
I appreciate the fact that you don't want to look back to the reasons we went into Iraq; most Republicans don't. Could it be that the truth would be too painful?
So, I think you would agree that staying in Iraq does not make us any safer here at home, despite Bush and Cheney's lies to the contrary. So, if pulling out will result in chaos, how long do we stay? How many American lives do we have to sacrifice for Bush and Cheney's stupidity?
I believe I have been consistent in stating that Bush did not deserve reelection in 2004. The WMD error was too glaring to be overlooked IMO. As for how long we stay, I believe Hillary will be making that decision at some point. We will still be there when it's her turn to decide.
Actually I think that is a misrepresentation. I dont think to any substantial amount the Arab people were radicalized by our invading of Afghanistan. They saw what happened on 9/11 and understood. We were attacking Afghanistan within a couple of months but a YEAR after 9/11 there was a huge memorial held for the victims in TEHRAN. No its not the same thing. Clearly using terrorism as an EXCUSE to invade Iraq radicalizea a whole lot more people than avenging the World Trade Center.
Solon,
You make an excellent point. I am actually somewhat baffled it even has to be made, though. It seems so patently obvious that nearly everyone except the American right remembers the genuine outpouring of support we received after 9-11. Arab countries and citizens expected us to go after the people behind 9-11. Most people understand that kind of justice.
The huge problem as Bruce points out, was that the reasoning for invading Iraq was entirely suspect and other countries grew wary of what they considered our blatant opportunism. It only became worse when it was discovered that there were no WMD's and America re-elected the guy who pulled off the greatest con-job or blunder (depending on your point of view) in recent (I am being generous) history.
I personally love this country, but I understand why others hate us. There is no doubt that the invasion of Iraq created many more times the number of terrorists that Afghanistan has.
Very good question. However, I think that going into Afganistan was the right thing to do, but Bush didn't do so well. He handed Bin Laden's location over to warlords who let him go, and screwed up keeping the Taliban down. Plus, that country was easy compared to Iraq. Smaller civilized areas, a weak and disorganized enemy. Hell, the Taliban drove jeeps instead of tanks. That was the right war, Iraq wasn't.
There are alot of domestic terrorists in our nation right now. Nazi Groups, radical right wingers. McCain supporters.
Very well done. Just snarky enough, and the timing was impeccable.
Kudos.
Yes - I'm terrified of Coulter and Savage (to name 2).
Indeed.
Some people are saying (TM) they currently occupy the White House...
Yeah, they're called Democrats and Republicans. They like to terrorize foreigners in distant lands with all our bombs and warplanes and missiles.
They must think we should leave our troops there so the turrists will have ample targets and not be inclined to travel overseas to get us and our children.
Here's an innovative excuse from White House spokeswoman Dana Perino yesterday: I can't be held accountable for statements I make when it turns out later on I didn't know what I was talking about.
The Riiiiiighthouse cracks me up- more and more I envision the keystone cops runnin' around... unfortunately THESE *cops* have nukes and no morals or ethics...
Yes, but she is a self-described "expert" on the globe not warming.
OMG!!!!
They're going to kill my children. What ever can I do?
The trick is to send other people's children to Iraq. If the bad guys are kept busy killing them, they won't bother coming here to kill your children. See?
I think that the orgnaizations that want to target the USA have been told not to. If Bush keeps up threatening Iran and not dealing fairly with the Palastinian among others the time will come when the so called terrorists will be called to arms. There is no reason to think that they are not already in the US.After years of abuse by the USA there comes a time to pay and it will be a very high cost. I just wish the targets would only be of the military nature and leave the average Joe out of it but I guess when you kill civilians you get that back in kind. Peace please.
The NeoClowns like to point out that there have been no U.S. attacks since 9-11, as if the moron in the White House actually had anything to do with it. I would point out that there were, what, 8 years between the two attacks on the World Trade Center? These people are apparently very patient...I wouldn't get too cocky just yet.
And just as another example of political courage, here he is trying to woo conservatives, and he voted against the Bush line on stem cells. That's another example of political courage.
Political courage = drumming up support amongst your base. In other words, any competent politician has loads of political courage.
And he said, "If you think that the enemy wouldn't kill American kids, you're crazy." And, you know -- and that is the lesson that Americans ought to take. They are going to come after us wherever we are, and they'll kill our kids as well.
What? Terrorists kill people? I had no idea!
Somebody get me a towel, I just dripped sarcasm all over myself.
That's a neat trick. Let me try...
The Democratic party is the party against child rapists. Others can vote Republican if they want, but personally I think people in favor of child rape are crazy.
Cool. My turn at a rebuttal:
Those democrats don't think you should be able to touch your very own children, even for discipline. Don't let the democrats raise YOUR children. Vote Republican.
Very neat! Elegant, in fact! But, darn it, I am a Democrat!
Hey, don't turn this into a partisan thing. I merely pointed out that McCain is showing about as much courage here as I did when I decided to have OJ with my breakfast this morning.
Actually, Iflurry, that shows quite a bit of courage on your part.
I would be too afraid to have OJ for breakfast ever since he murdered his ex wife & that waiter.
So Mescal is afraid to let a black man come over for breakfast.Don't think he wouldn't fight to deny other rights to YOU AND YOUR CHILDREN!.
Man all you guys are good. I am in awe
HBL is right, Iflurry
I WILL fight to deny you & your children other rights! You'll NEVER get your own cable show if I have anything to say about it... THE CONSTITUTION BE DAMNED!!!!
So what Kondrake like McCain. You know Katie C can hardly bed Hillary and CNN (Clinton News Network) is doing everything they can to derail Barry O.
As if you didn't notice the whole darn lot of journalist in this country aren't subjective in their news stories. The problem you libs have is admitting the trith about yourselves.
Enjoyed your post, Valsetz. Especially the way you put letters together using the keyboard.
What's really amazing about it though is that if you look even beyond the artistry of it's composition, it's chock full of delicious social observations, too.
Such as journalists not being subjective in their reporting. How true. I think we all wish that journalists would just focus on themselves.
And the nugget about Katie C trying to bed Hillary is pretty spicy!
I LOVE IT when a neoConned tells me what's wrong with ME.
Uh, Valsetz536, (you are 536 years old? Dang!), how do you get logically from 'reporters aren't subjective' to 'you libs have a problem admitting the 'trith' about yourselves.'???
I'd refer you to all the right-'wind' pundo-crats out there who pontificate from their thrones at WaPo, NYT, etc, before you go spouting the tired old meme of 'left wing' MSM. Give me a frickin' break, man.
Keep listening to Rush LieBaugh, and you'll always be updated on the latest spin from the RNC and K-Ro!
Yeah... how DARE Valsetz536 claim that we liberals have trouble admitting the trith about ourselves. I've been admitting the trith about myself for YEARS. In fact, I come from a long line of trith tellers.
Boy... the nerve of some cons.
I'm sooooo tired of these blood lapping jerk offs.Why does anyone take anything these serial failures have to say seriously?How many more burnt decapitated smoking corpses is it gonna take to finally get you off "Morton"?
I consider Mort to be a "cuckold" liberal, meaning he'll eventually say and do anything to please the superior male whose arguing with him. Barnes would be a joke on any other forum with a real man liberal. They'd eat his ass alive. But, Fox is good at hiring this kind of talking head. Think Alan Colmes, Geraldo and , to a lesser extend, Juan Williams, if you tend to disagree with my premise. All of them have their disgusting suck-ass moments vis-a-vis their conservative counterparts. Oh well, I still want the turds to keep on talking (Coulter, Savage, Reagan, et al.) and doing the Bush/Limberger swagger right on up to election day 2008! We'll lay it in their warm bowels again!