Wash. Post uncritically quoted McCain accusing Dems of voting "against funding for our troops"
In a September 9 entry on The Washington Post's The Trail blog, staff writer Dan Balz reported presidential candidate and Sen. John McCain's (R-AZ) statement that "Today, leading presidential candidates vote against funding for our troop engaged in the war in Afghanistan and Iraq." Balz added: "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) both voted against an Iraq funding bill earlier this year," referring to their May 24 votes against a war funding bill that did not include a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. But as Media Matters for America repeatedly noted in response to other media figures' uncritical reporting of similar attacks by McCain or his staff, McCain himself voted against an emergency spending bill that funded the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on March 29, which President Bush ultimately vetoed, citing its provision for a withdrawal timetable.
From the September 9 post in The Washington Post's The Trail blog:
Arizona Sen. John McCain (R) took on the three leading Democratic presidential candidates Saturday, accusing them of advocating policies that would lead to defeat in Iraq and that would weaken America's national security.
"Today, leading Democratic presidential candidates vote against funding for our troops engaged in war in Afghanistan and Iraq," McCain said in a speech to the California Republican Party convention. "Today, leading Democratic presidential candidates question whether there is a war on terror, offer to enter into unconditional negotiations with our worst enemies, and talk about countering the forces of radicalism by advocating surrender to them in Iraq."
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) both voted against an Iraq funding bill earlier this year. Former North Carolina senator John Edwards has charged that President Bush's global war on terror amounts to a bumper sticker that has been used to enact policies detrimental to the country. Obama has said he would be prepared to meet with leaders of hostile nations without preconditions.
if you want to understand why "ending the war" is a difficult issue for the democrats, it's because of these kinds of attacks and the way the media is willing to portray them. no one is against "funding for our troops". this is how kerry got tagged as a flip flopper, which the press was more than willing to go along with. there are always procedural votes that democrats tend to vote against and those which the republicans tend to vote against. but in the end the troops get what they need. we are in the middle of what is essentially a civil war in iraq. this is the same kind of mindless rhetoric, as mccain well knows, that kept us in vietnam. if we withdraw, if we don't hold the line, communism will spread to every corner of the world. it didn't happen, and al qaeda will not follow us home if we leave iraq.
Looks likely they are already here, just waiting to figure out how to do their dirty deed. And, as a guess, this crop is probably home-grown, rather than foreign nationals, which would also defeat most of the anti-immigrant "security" we foolishly rely upon.
BTW, I'm agreeing with you. Neither staying nor leaving Iraq is determinative of whether/when we have that next attack.
If they do follow us home and have no tags or any other kind of identification, Can we keep them?
What if we promise to feed them and walk them everyday and still get our homework and chores done?
I think Democrats need to change the phrase "funding the troops" into "funding the war." The troops will not go naked in Iraq if we decide not to fund it. All of our armed service will always have a Bill Gates salary budget. And if the military finds that they can't pay for this war if Democrats (crosses fingers) cut off funding for it, then LEAVE! Go home to your families and make love (not war).
Is it any wonder why McCain is circling the drain? He has tied his campaign to Bush's war. John "the Manchurian candidate" MCain is a joke. He lost all credibility when his kissed the ass of Jerry Falwell. However, you are correct when you say that the media will portray the dems as soft on terror. And the dems will take it and ask for more like a battered wife.
McCain does not even deserve the title "wh**e". At least a "working girl" is honest, she has a product and is willing to do just about anything to get you to "buy" her product. McCain is a flip flopping, pandering, how far can you lean down to kiss any body's a** fake. He service to his country will always be applauded but his current a** kissing is shameful.
You are so correct, McCain in my view is the worst type of politican. The thing that irks me the most is his view on this illegal war. We know one thing, if the Republicans whichever one is elected (other than Ron Paul) the war will continue and more innocent Iraqis and Americans will die. Shame on McCain.
I agree with Doris. Ron Paul is a libertarian running as a Republican so that he may have a chance. Libertarians don't have it all together yet (I wish they did), but they're attitude toward the Iraq war is spot on. They want our military to come home and protect our borders as mandated in the constitution. Think of the money we'd save.
Libertarians might never get it together in so far as their domestic agenda can only be described as manic conservatism.
McCain has been in politics long enough (he took over Barry Goldwater's seat, a true Republican) that he should know that not every vote for a bill is really a vote for all that's included in that bill, and not every nay vote is a vote against everything that's in that bill.
Any politician who deceives the voters about these kinds of votes loses credibility with me.
I just wish they could be honest. I realize that an honest politician is almost an oxymoron, but they could do a much better job of being halfway honest. The Republicans in office currently are besmirching the good name of Republicans with their actions.
McCain the politician is a sinking boat. calling a student a jerk is not classy politics nor acceptable gut reaction to a legitimate question. How old you are when taking office is a legit question. back on topic, where is the enormous amount of money being spent on Iraq going ?
where is the enormous amount of money being spent on Iraq going ? Wolf
My question also. With all the $$$ allocated towards reconstruction why don't the Iraqis have electricity 24 hours a day instead of 2 to 4 hours? Why don't they have adequate sewage? Why are they waiting in long lines for fuel in this oil rich country? Who are the people appointed by Junior to head reconstruction efforts?.
Again we have MSM who don't and won't ask the hard questions.
calling a student a jerk is not classy politics nor acceptable gut reaction to a legitimate question.
Eh, I thought it was funny. I heard a replay of him saying it, and it was clear even in audio that his tongue was in his cheek.
I'm not a McCain supporter by any stretch, but that joke isn't worth attacking the guy over. I think his campaign is desperate to get any publicity at this time so they're letting McCain be McCain.