The McCain Myth
They’re playing the fear card again. Disappointingly, so is one fear-pusher who should know better: Joe Lieberman. Lieberman says we’re likely to be attacked in 2009.
“Our enemies will test the new president early,” Lieberman, I (don’t like Democrats)-CT, told Face The Nation host Bob Schieffer. “Remember that the truck bombing of the World Trade Center happened in the first year of the Clinton administration. 9/11 happened in the first year of the Bush administration. John McCain is ready to take the reigns on January 20, 2009. He doesn’t need any training.
[youtube=http://youtube.com/watch?v=VgrvdZbUgmg]
And even though McCain adviser Charlie Black said a terror attack on the US would be a big advantage to their campaign, Black and the McCainiacs are wrong. Frank Rich envisions a scenario where, in private, they’re gaming out, “Hey, when would be the best time for an attack, before or after the convention? Which state, a red or a blue one?”
But when they start going on about how more prepared they are to weather an attack on the US, hit them with two words: ka trina. Homeland Security czar Michael Chertoff didn’t know what was going on in the Houston Convention Center, even as it was being broadcast live on national television.
And, as you look at who’s around McCain you see a history of ineptitude. Foreign policy adviser Randy Scheunemann, a PNAC member who headed something called the Commitee for the Liberation of Iraq, to sell the Iraq war (and McCain was on the board of TCFTLOI), pushed for diverting resources from Pakistan and Afghanistan to Iraq. We see how that turned out. (Monday’s New York Times has a piece on how our policies have led to al Qaeda growing in Pakistan).
Another McCain adviser, former CIA director James Woolsey, promoted the idea that Iraq was linked to the Oklahoma City bombing, and that accused Iranian spy Ahmed Chalabi was a trusted source of intelligence. (And Chalabi had strong ties to Charlie Black).
And then there’s neo-McCain supporter Rudy Giuliani, “America’s Mayor”, who wanted New York’s command center in the World Trade Center, because he didn’t want to trek all the way to Brooklyn.
So, the next time some neo-con tells you that we’re safer with McCain than with Obama, point out that McCain represents the status quo, and the status quo is built upon people whose ideas and management led to the very problems McCain would have to face as president.
Great post Alan. I don’t understand the Repubes fear that Democrats won’t fight back.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
http://action.citizen.org/petition.jsp?petition_KEY=1280&track=W8PCAN
June 30th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
damn, Alan. well researched post. i’m going to check out the references and then comment.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:50 pm
WOOWWW!!! At least he’s better than Obama.
PUMA!!!
http://www.notobama.weeply.com
June 30th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Whoa, Alan, so much guilt by association! Wasn’t that your problem with Obama and Rev. Wright et al.?
Who says that the Katrina response is indicative of how we would respond to a terrorist attack? Isn’t that comparing apples and oranges?
“Fear card” might also equal the “reality card” as well! As far as terrorist attacks, I’m a hick from Tennessee…it’s gonna be NYC that would be hit, not my neck of the woods. So, actually, I am pro-protecting-big-city-libs even though I don’t even live near you guys! See how compassionate I am??
June 30th, 2008 at 4:51 pm
Well, the Katrina response is certainly indicative of how the civilian side of our government dealt with Iraq, and how they dealt with Afghanistan, and how they dealt with catching Osama bin Ladin, and how they dealt with the anthrax mailings, and how they dealt with the economy, and sub-prime mortgages, and the national infrastructure, and alternative energy.
But as far as spending money we don’t have, and money we won’t have for a thousand years, if ever, they’ve done a heck of a job.
June 30th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
alan you are a walking punchline on your talk show. The weak, glasses wearing liberal (cant we talk this out?). How could we possibly be safer with Obama? Obama has no track record except for the fact that he is a believer in racist rhetoric.
June 30th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Oh boy Scottie-poo you sure showed Alan didn’t ya? How does it feel to be so superior to others…
June 30th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
The republicans are dedicated to national defense, but not very worried about internal domestic issues. That’s the problem with a McCain presidency.
I wonder about FuryUs’s first comment myself… why are republicans so convinced that if Obama is elected our nation will immediately fall victim to terrorist attacks? What, is he going to not read memos and reports that warn of imminent dangers?
June 30th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
The weak, glasses wearing liberal (cant we talk this out?). by scott June 30, 2008 at 5:06 pm
As opposed to the fat, cigar smoking, bombastic, drug taking, hypocritical cyst assed chicken hawk conservative Rush Limbaugh?
By the way, Alan Colmes is a runner, is in great shape and probably has very powerful legs. As opposed to Rush Limbaugh who is probably too lazy to even go to the bathroom by himself.
And doesn’t Rush use reading glasses all the time?
oops.
June 30th, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Bill Schulz from our (Epi) beloved Red Eye is also a runner.
June 30th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Joe Lieberman offered the original idea of “Homeland Security” and therefore he must have supported or offered the Domestic Spying Constitutional violations too. Joe is the epitome of what’s wrong in America and our politics. It’s all about keeping power, spending money, and utilizing the fear to manipulate people on both sides of the isle. Democrats got it right when we dumped Joe. It is absolutely wrong to hint about any national security threat and it’s even worse to talk about them in public. It tells the “evildoers” exactly what we know and where they can hurt us. Alan missed an opportunity on tonight’s show. Someone from the CIA asked, “Why haven’t we been hit since 9-11?” The only Liberal response should be, “Why were we hit on 9-11?” President Bush thought reading “My Pet Goat” was more important than national security? He was on vacation before reading the book. We knew enough, but we didn’t tell the people to be on alert. When the threat is credible, the public needs to know to address the holes.
June 30th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
lol epiphany. as soon as i read “fat”, i knew exactly who you were talking about.
June 30th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
I don’t think that the Republicans are dedicated to national defense, as much as they are to lining the pockets of the defence industry.
July 1st, 2008 at 6:56 am
interesting thought, OL
July 1st, 2008 at 12:36 pm