Just Not Getting It
What in the world is wrong with John McCain? First, he goes on David Letterman to announce his presidential bid -- even though he shuns conservative media like the plague.
Then he pronounced that lives have been "wasted" in Iraq.
It was wrong when Barack Obama said it, and it's wrong for McCain to say it. Like Obama, he should apologize. Sauce for the goose, and all that.
It's becoming increasingly difficult to figure out a strategy by which McCain thinks he will secure the Republican nomination. After all, Democrats and the press don't get to vote in the state nominating primaries.
Then he pronounced that lives have been "wasted" in Iraq.
It was wrong when Barack Obama said it, and it's wrong for McCain to say it. Like Obama, he should apologize. Sauce for the goose, and all that.
It's becoming increasingly difficult to figure out a strategy by which McCain thinks he will secure the Republican nomination. After all, Democrats and the press don't get to vote in the state nominating primaries.
posted by LadybugUSA at 11:36 AM
4 Comments:
Not that I care to defend either Obama or McCain, but is saying lives were "wasted" necessarily the same as saying they "died in vain"? In other words, if tactics and strategies were indeed stupid or inept, would not the lives be "wasted" when they could've been better utilized under more sound tactics and strategies? As an analogy, what if I was shooting at a target, say a terrorist head-chopper, and he was moving rapidly behind several items of cover. Everytime he jumps out and moves, I shoot, but he's too quick and ducks behind the next rock or tree. Half a dozen times I try and miss due to his quickness. Then, when he's run out of items to hide behind, he runs straight for me. I pick him off with the next shot. Didn't I waste bullets trying the strategy of trying to hit him before he concealed himself, when I could've waited for him to better expose himself? My purpose never changed, thus those bullets, even if I never hit the guy at all, were not spent in vain, but for a purpose. Thus, in a similar manner, if the buffoons like Obama and McCain used the term "wasted" regarding the troops lost in battle, could they not have been referring to them in the same manner as my analogy, as clumsy as it may be? If so, I don't know that they should be taking heat for saying the lives were "wasted". Just wondering. Maybe too much.
I read somewhere that he backtracked and meant to say "sacrificed" or something like that.
I haven't heard/read his comments in context but I think it might be likely he didn't mean it.
Which, for me, is a pity of course. I preferred the McCain of 2000 to the flailing self-parody that he is today. He's pleasing nobody, neither the left, nor the right, nor those in the middle.
I won't vote for McCain. Ever since the Campaign Finance Reform (incumbent) act, I consider him a turncoat to conservative values.
Of course he meant it, OSO. You think he was speaking off the cuff? Hell no. These guys write, review and practice their speeches. He knew what he wanted to say. The question was whether he meant it as some are suggesting.
Post a Comment
<< Home