McCain trumpets the surge but that is a hollow sham.
The July 21, 2008 article "McCain Knee-Capped by Al-Maliki" at
states "This weekend's surprise endorsement by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki of Sen. Barack Obama's call for U.S. combat forces to leave Iraq by mid-2010 marks a serious setback to Sen. John McCain, who has tried hard to depict his Democratic rival as "naïve" on foreign policy, especially with respect to Iraq....
Even McCain's staunchest supporters admitted Monday that al-Maliki's comments constituted what the right-wing National Review magazine called a "body-blow" to the Republican candidate, who has made Iraq -- and what he claims is the unqualified success of the "surge" strategy in the past year there -- the centerpiece of his efforts to claim the mantle of seasoned foreign policy veteran."
That was about a month ago. After Maliki's remarks both mini-me and big bro43 tried to baffle the red staters about Iraq.
The July 25, 2008 article "Maliki Demands All U.S. Troops Pull Out by 2011 --
Iraqi Leader Pushes Hard on Accord" at
states "Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki demanded a complete U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq by 2011 as he embarked Monday on an attempt to win support among Iraqi leaders for a draft security accord with the United States.
Maliki's comments appeared to be an attempt to extract further concessions from American officials, less than a week after both sides said they had agreed to remove all U.S. combat troops by the end of 2011, if the security situation remained relatively stable, but leave other American forces in place. The U.S. plan is to leave as many as 40,000 troops to continue to assist Iraq in training, logistics and intelligence for an undefined period."
The GOP will try to spin this as the article continues "An agreement has not been signed, and so from our perspective, there is no agreement until there's an agreement signed," said Tony Fratto, a White House spokesman. "But any decisions on troops will be based on the conditions on the ground in Iraq. That has always been our position; it continues to be our position."
U.S. officials, however, have signaled willingness to compromise with Maliki's government in order to sign an agreement by the end of President Bush's term. There is additional pressure because the United Nations' authorization for American troops to remain in Iraq expires at the end of the year; if no accord is signed before then, U.S. troops will have no legal basis to remain in the country."
The GOP depends on being the Daddy party-strong on the international front, but the GOP is failing as article continues "Administration officials have expressed frustration as well as admiration for the way Iraqi politicians have negotiated, largely in public and through the media, forcing U.S. negotiators to become more flexible before time runs out to reach a deal, said people familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the talks. U.S. officials now appear willing to accept a specific date for total withdrawal as long as there is some acknowledgement that it be conditional.
"We've been opposed to arbitrary dates on the calendar, especially when things were tough from a security standpoint," said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman. "As conditions improve, it certainly enables us to have the discussion about goals going forward and where we hope Iraqi security forces will be."
Is this "facts on the ground" or "aspirational goals" or "fixed dates for withdrawals" or some other propaganda phrase?
puts it thusly "Last Thursday, the U.S. endorsed a draft agreement that would remove "combat troops from Iraqi cities by next June and from the rest of the country by the end of 2011." Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe both told reporters that the 2011 date was an "aspirational timeline."
But Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki doesn't view it as "aspirational." In a speech to tribal leaders today, Maliki said that the U.S. and Iraq have reached an agreement on "a fixed date" for withdrawal."
Mini-me can't say a word about the surge without being seen as a liar because we aren't staying there for a hundred years, or until the "facts on the ground" warrant our leaving-we are getting booted out by big bro 43's puppet.
Mini-me's domestic policies are hollow also.
The article "Obama, Accepting Nomination, Draws Sharp Contrast With McCain --
Crowd of 84,000 Hears Policy Specifics and Criticism of GOP"
describes Obama's word as he said "America, we cannot turn back, not with so much work to be done, not with so many children to educate and so many veterans to care for, not with an economy to fix and cities to rebuild and farms to save, not with so many families to protect and so many lives to mend. America, we cannot turn back."
Obama took note of the GOP's hypocrisy as "If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."
As the article continued Obama "pledged a $150 billion investment to wean the nation from imported oil in 10 years, with wind and solar power, biofuels, nuclear energy, clean coal technology and domestic natural gas, ratifying the goals of the man who preceded him on the podium, Nobel laureate and former vice president Al Gore.
Obama spoke of eliminating capital gains taxes for small businesses and high-tech start-ups and cutting taxes for working families, a point he repeated twice to get it across. He promised to go through the federal budget "line by line" to eliminate programs that don't work.
He renewed his pledge to "end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan." He warned Republicans eager to portray him as weak: "We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe. The Bush-McCain foreign policy has squandered the legacy that generations of Americans -- Democrats and Republicans -- have built, and we are to restore that legacy."
W's domestic policy has caused a weakening of the dollar, losses in jobs and the sub-prime mortgage crisis.
The article continues with this from Obama's speech "And he portrayed McCain again and again as the personification of a third term of President Bush.
"Senator McCain likes to talk about judgment, but really, what does it say about your judgment when you think George Bush was right more than 90 percent of the time?" Obama asked. "I don't know about you, but I'm not ready to take a 10 percent chance on change."
Only a masochist would want mini-me to continue these domestic policies and W's international policies are worse.
Mini-me likes to make attacks on Obama's experience, but how did he pick a vice president with less than Obama's?
states "Between the U.S. Senate, and the Illinois Senate, Barack Obama has 11 years of public service. And as Al Gore pointed out last night, that's the same exact record of service another person had who went on to become one of our greatest presidents, Abraham Lincoln.
Sarah Palin has less than 2 years in public office, all of it serving as Governor of Alaska. We're not picking on Palin, neither for her time served or for being a woman. It's high time we open the door to closed jobs to everyone of all race or gender. But less than 2 years experience does not equal 11 years experience. "