Via Digby, we find Bill Richardson committing the supreme transgression of disparaging St. John McCain:
“The leading advocate for escalating the war is Senator John McCain. I have served with John in Congress and I respect him. But John McCain is wrong, dead wrong to think that we can solve Iraq’s political crisis through military escalation.”
“There are no quick or easy answers to the crisis in Iraq. Our choices are between bad options and worse ones. Some prefer military escalation. Some choose staying the course. These options are illusions. The only realistic choice we have is to stand down militarily and let the Iraqis stand up and face the political crisis which only they can resolve.”
Jeffrey Feldman has taken to calling him "Lord McCain," which I might actually like even better. Whatever you want to call him, it's his escalation, good for Richardson for sticking it to him (Vilsack did much the same thing recently).
You break it, you buy it. Right?
Related posts:
- Public Option: Simple, Familiar, Essential, and Deserving of Obama’s Support
- Pride And Petulance
- Late Night: The Babble Phlegm of the Wingnut Republic; OR, What’s a Half a Million or So, Give or Take?
- Late Night: The Wacky World of Wingnut Funny
- RedState Fundraising Drive for Wingnut Senatorial Candidates: Epic Fail
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Zed?
FITZ
Jane
I’m so glad you’re safe
Woohoo! Hi Jane. Richardson nailed McCain, absolutely nailed him.
We need EVERYONE to speak up like Richardson… I’m just sickened that junya wants more troops in Iraq…
Active-duty soldiers, both officers and enlisted are now planning to petition Congress to withdraw American troops from Iraq.
Don’t know how to do links, but I found this on HuffingtonPost via Yahoo news. It was written by Marc Cooper for The Nation. Article says you can find the article on the web at:
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070101/cooperweb
I hate to admit this, but I actually voted for McCain in 2000 in a primary. He was out of the race, but I wanted to cast a vote. I was fooled by him. Now he’s showing his true colours. So much for the saying “those who have served in war are reluctant to start them”.
Call McCain what he is: The Manchurian Senator
Note to McCain: be careful what you ask for, some idiot may take you seriously, thereby robbing you of a campaign platform by demonstrating what a bad idea you had.
My mom was a die-hard McCain-ite but she has now reformed.
well, supposedly
that’s what powell told bush long before this war
yet bush has yet to buy anything
Oilfieldguy @ 8
Pat Lange suggests escallation could become
Stalingrad on the Tigris
http://turcopolier.typepad.com….._tyrannis/
The
Pottery BarnBoughtery Porn rule: you break it, you buy itlet’s call him (too) late for the presidency.
perris @ 10..and if Powell had had the moral character at his time in history he could have prevented this disaster. History will not be kind to Colin Powell.
Janeane The Acerbic Goblin @ 6
you are not alone; I have friends and family who did the very same thing, thinking a tortured (son of a) man (who could have and wanted to get him out of there) POW would never use his own experience to fight another illegal, bloodsucking war.
(they were shocked that McCain, who was slimed by rove and boosh, would ever, ever support this)
Remember all those Bob Dole jokes about how old he was in ‘96. Won’t Raisin McCain be about the same age in ‘08 as Bob Dole was in ‘96. Maybe it’s time to start recycling those jokes.
Steve @
14
I think Powell was probably as much for this war as any other person in this administration. But, he always wanted wiggle room in the event that things went sour (part of his dependence upon the so-called Powell Doctrine of overwhelming force). Now that it has, indeed, turned sour, he can say, “I told you so.”
Powell’s fundamental flaw has always been that he has consistently showed more allegiance to the guy above him than to the American people he was sworn to serve.
Flying by and sorry if this is redundant, but I’m skim-reading the Time Person of the Year cover story [it’s “You”]. And one of the people they include is S. R. Sidarth and they subtitle him “The Accidental Assassin.” Excuse me?
Why don’t they just paste a target on him for one of the rightwingnuts operating in the same sociopathic soup as the dittoheads and neocons.
What kind of stupid, inflammatory, predatory journalism is this supposed to be? Oh, wait….
I don’t if its so much that McCain is a warmonger– it’s just that he’s the most unprincipled Presidential candidate I’ve ever seen. There are not limits to his ambition, nothing he won’t do or say to get elected.
If Bush ordered Harry Reid arrested for treason, with summary execution following shortly, McCain would moan and whine on national TV about how Bush has gone to far this time, and he doesn’t think the President has the authority—and then he’d show up for the execution and pull the switch himself.
He’s a very, very dangerous man… possibly more dangerous than Bush, IMO.
Prairie Sunshine @ 18
Time continues to employ Joe Klein, what more do you need to know.
They did not!!!!!!!!!!
Nooooo, Prairie Sunshine, tell me that’s not true.
(I have not read the article.)
;(
If we want to have an impact on who is nominated by the Republicans we need to start getting OUR wurlitzer cranked up asap.
McCain is all war all the time. His being a POW you’d think would argue against being prowar. But instead I think it’s like his being the victim of domestic violence, waiting for one’s own turn to be on top, inflicting violence on others to show one’s own power and control.
Prairie Sunshine @ 18
They need some blog love. Ready folks?
We need to push back on the theme that McCain is an independent, a moderate [choke], a ‘maverick’ whatever that means, and a perfectly reasonable person to lead our country.
Time to get to work.
OK.. tell me if my logic is totally wrong here…
- McCain plan: We keep our troops in Iraq plus lots more
- the situation continues to deteriorate.. Sunnis slaughter shiias and vice versa
- saudis decide to start arming sunnis
- sunnis ethnically cleanse shiias, while our boys look helplessly on
- iran starts to more openly arm the shiias
- saudis escalate, iran invades
- 300,000 (or is it a milllion by that time?) of our troops are caught in the middle of the great war of our era…
Am I wrong?
Escalation.
egregious @ 26
Elevatoring
Steve @ 14
No, I blame the Times, the Post, and Tony Blair. I knew that Powell would say whatever he needed to say to protect his superiors coughMyLaicough but I TRUSTED Blair and the 2 newspapers. I thought if they knew things they couldn’t say, I would go along with them.
No more.
blub @ 25
We are in deep shit here. Sans paddle.
LHP I’m fine, in LA for a few, the weather is nice.
Last I heard, 30% of Iraq are Sunni, 60% are Shia and the rest of the people we have made miserable are Kurds, etc.
We made this civil war and brutal occupation happen.
I am not blaming them (any Iraqi), any of them, ever.
Leadup to world wars.
Did you ever go back and read newspapers in the months before a world war? Things seem mostly calm except for some troubled spots. Then it gets a little more worrisome. Then things accelerate and all of a sudden, whaddya know, war.
Sobering.
angie @ 31
We WANTED this civil war to happen because it helps create an ‘enemy’ now that the Soviets are gone and they can’t sufficiently demonize the people that babysit our children and tend our lawns.
Can’t sell arms if there isn’t an enemy™
Do people realize there is a worldwide black market in NUCLEAR arms? Start with AQ Khan in Pakistan. Follow the money. See whose voices are being suppressed.
blub @ 25
Perhaps on one point–Iran invades. Iran does not have a history of invading other countries, and its arms purchases in the last few years have been decidedly defensive, not offensive. They’ve been trying to boost their air defense capabilities, something that is of no use beyond its borders.
Given previous history, their support would continue to be on the sly.
Also, it’s unlikely for the Saudis to openly support the Sunnis (their rich wackos will continue to do so, but without official government sanction) as long as US troops remain in Iraq–they’ve said as much recently.
“The American people are confused…” — John McCain.
Shouldn’t a hard-working member of the press devoted to truth-seeking be asking the Senator about this?
What are they confused about, Senator McCain?
David Ehrenstein @ 7
The real Manchurian candidate appeared as a bit player in the staged and nearly successful assassination of President Reagan.
Cui bono?
Slothrop @ 35
Correction, Senator. I’m not confused at all. About you, or the nature of the war.
egregious @ 32
The only rational explanation for why any change of course is being delayed until next year is that the natural escalation in that region will draw the other players in deeper.
How would support change if one or more foreign countries were blamed for the deaths of several hundred troops in a few days. How about a massive uprising that’s blamed on insurgents?
The political risk of attacking Syria/Iran is lessened if our aggression is seen as self defense.
Republican platform for 2008: The American people are confused — vote for McCain!
Thank Bill Richardson.
Ronald Reagan in 1980: 69 years old
Bob Dole in 1996: 73 years old
John Sidney McCain III in 2008: 72 years old
Slothrop @ 35
we’re sore losers.
The backbone and truth of our nation are both missing now. Being a reactionary now in 2006 with our credibility and honor at stake means pure honesty and being the purveyors of justice and it must flow like a flooded river, imho.
We have a loooooooooooong way to go.
montag, I think you’re being too hard on Powell. He was Secretary of State. It happened on his watch. He bears great responsibility. I can’t find anyone else in the WH, however, who was less enthusiastic about it or quicker to criticize it.
If he had been a member of White House Iraq Group I would have a different opinion.
* Karl Rove
* Karen Hughes
* Mary Matalin
* Andrew Card
* James R. Wilkinson
* Nicholas E. Calio
* Condoleezza Rice
* Stephen Hadley
* I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby
* Michael Gerson
Powell was Chair of the Joint Chiefs during Desert Shield/Desert Storm. He demonstrated his willingness not to engage the military in an occupation for which it was totally unsuited.
I think it’s important to segregate those most responsible for this from others. If Powell had been more supportive, Bush wouldn’t have fired him in favor of Rice. Also, I think Powell continues to be an effective ally in getting us out. You don’t hear him supporting McCain.
egregious @ 28
I am with you on this. I think Lawrence O’Donnell summed it up best the other day at HuffPo. He admitted he was not against the war at first, though he was never for it. He like others (including myself) thought it likely that Iraq had WMD because we thought we could trust our government.
I was skeptical, but thought Tony Blair would not lie. While I wanted the inspections to go ahead, and was not for the rush to war, I didn’t exactly have a NO WAR lawn sign on my lawn. That was my bad. I was fooled. And that is what makes it so hard for the remaining 29% to admit Iraq is wrong. First they have to admit they were fooled. That is what took majority so long to come around.
John Casper @ 42
I think you’re ignoring the bulk of his career. And, if he was so damned skeptical about the war, why did he actively encourage it? Have you forgotten the dog & pony show at the UN? Have you forgotten the reaction in the press–and therefore, public opinion–after his little demonstration? If he genuinely thought it was a bad idea, why didn’t he say so before the invasion. And, if necessary, why didn’t he resign over it? As I said, loyalty to guy above him, not to the American public.
It may be that the bloom is off the rose with Lord McCain. The press, I think (with the exception of Tweety) seem to be less inclined to fawn over him.
With Preznit Horse Fluffer lovin’-the-”Virgin Mary”-Cheney, Talibangelical Wingnut heads are exploding apace. St John has gone to “Lourdes in Lynchburg” to make obescience to Fat Jerry and begin his courting of the Christofascist vote. But I suspect that they will begin to wonder about his credentials; after all he was for gays before he was against them, doncha know? I think that they’ll remember that the Steely-Eyed Pretzel Swallower was too …
Every prominent wingnut in Preznit Contention is going for the Bashing of the Gay, except Newt and Rudy. How long it will be for Newt is only subject to the seriousness of his delusional “you love me, you really love me” run for the Rose Garden. Rudy probably won’t survive the publication of the details of what was his messy divorce to Donna Hanover, and the attendant scandals that went with it. He might have been “America’s Mayor” but dollars to donuts the fundies and wingers who see him that way have no clue about his shenanigans before he was “America’s Mayor”, more like “America’s Gigolo”… and then there’s Bernie Kerik for him to explain away.
So, while I wouldn’t get my BBQ fork out to stick into Lord McCain just yet, I’d have say that the King of Arizona Pork is just about 160 degrees, and on my grill, that’s about done.
Interesting that uses that term which was so popular back in he day (the vietnam days). Although I would refer to Bush’s “surge” proposal as “squirt”.
I met Richardson at Yearly Kos and complimented him on his choice of last name (we have the same one). He didn’t get it at first – bad sign :-)
Oh shit, I just came out! Oh well, was going to do it in a few weeks anyway, when I start my blog on energy and science (and when some adults are finally in charge in DC).
phsycological description and phrase of the day;
“escalating commitment”
Powell’s doctrine is cited too often and too lovingly; he should have stood up for his own doctrine.
Powell covered up My Lai and lived on to be Alma’s ever-loving husband and the man who tried mightily to distance himself from the killing fields.
Now, he commends Israel in the destruction of Lebanon; never had the courage to speak out for soldiers and their families; and yet, falls back on his medals and honorariums, to build his field of dreams.
ptooey!
McCain’s control-freak personality traits will get in the way of the free market forces and ultimately hurt the lucrative internet markets.
A deadlocked GOP convention (divided among Rudy, StJohn, Brownback) might turn to Powell in 2008; his current stance is to smooth the way for that eventuality.
How about “Emperor McCain”? I like “Lord McCain” and all, but “Emperor” has the evil Star Wars association.
Emperor McCain, Dark Lord of Military Escalation.
thegris @ 51
nice.
Oh to be a Wingnut…
When I grow up, there’s nothin’ I’d rather be,
Than a stark-ravin’ Wingnut, swingin’ in a tree.
There’s nothin’ we wouldn’t lie about, so spare me the bile.
There’s nobody we wouldn’t steal from, gimme that sucker child!
We’ll charge your grandma for treason, iffen she makes even a peep.
We’ll lock her up in Gitmo and there for evermore she’ll keep.
Not ‘titled to a lawyer, not even a brief.
We’ll even waterboard your grandpa if he gives us any grief.
Oh the joys of bein’ a Wingnut, free from law and sense,
Everything belongs to us Wingnuts, even the President.
We don’t have no principles, no morals for me,
I’m a stark-ravin’ Wingnut, munchin’ Cheetos in a tree.
The soon-to-be-introduced preznit campaign theme song of Lord “We’re losin’, let’s escalate!” McCain. Lovingly illustrated in 4 crayon color by Junya. Adapted from a mumble by Deadeye Cheney”.
John Casper @ 42..I guess that is my point. The Iraq Study group was/is a bunch of political hacks doing the bidding of a psychopath, to justify a pre-determined result. Powell had the Vietnam experience and had said it wouldn’t happen again. He had the experience of GW-I and had been involved in making the correct choices. He knew the intel was bullshit. He had his time at a defining point in history and he didn’t have it. Of all the people involved in this disaster, Powell knew better, and if he had had the balls and quit or was fired, I don’t think the war would have happened. Bush would have folded. IMHO
I’m not that optimistic here. I thought the Saudis have pretty already already said that they plan to do that.. or maybe that’s just posturing. The historical pattern of Saudi foreign policy, is they do whatever the heck they want and we retroactively rationalize it. I will buy the argument that Iran may be more prudent, but, remember, they were attacked by Iraq once and fought a long war because of it.. in which hundreds of thousands of their people died… this suggests to me that they will, from their position of relative strength, want to head off any prospect of a strong Sunni state emerging out of the chaos of Iraq.. by invasion if necessay. I don’t think that the geopolitics of this situation are good at all… in point of fact, they look uglier than anything in the world has for a long while… and the fact that the US won’t be in a posiiton to play peacemaker suggests that a regional escalation is probably more likely than not.
ET if you’re here, Ok kiddo is NOT blaming the minority kids who enlist because that’s their best option in this sorry economy.
See my comment, end of swopa, for more.
The other thing is.. and I want to emphasize that this is not a conspiracy theory so much as much as it is a weighing of motivations.. I would be willing to bet that there may be a few American hawks (neoneocons?) who wouldn’t be upset at all if such a regional war did happen. Their greedy, stupid eyes would be moist with Christmas-morning images of Marshall plans and the great Christian/Euro-American-led reconstruction of the middle east… an opportunity to do for the region what their insane policies failed to do for Iraq… the Samuel P Huntingtonization of the world, with us waging preemptive war to ensure that OUR civilization comes out on top.
The sad thing is, that before 9/11 American foreign policy beyond our own hemisphere was predicated on us keeping the peace.. or helping to do it. Now, thanks to these warmongerers, it’s about (clumsily) using military force to reshape the world into their image of utopia.
No, I’m not, but you are. You conveniently ignored that he was Chair of the Joint Chiefs during Gulf Storm.
Maybe you ought to go back and reread my comment. I never used the word “skeptical.”
No, I specifically said, he bears “great responsibility.”
Here’s what I wrote: “It happened on his watch. He bears great responsibility.”
Here’s what I wrote: “It happened on his watch. He bears great responsibility.” I wish he had. I think he made a great mistake by not speaking out against it, Bush would have fired him a lot sooner.
Here’s what I wrote: “It happened on his watch. He bears great responsibility.”
I completely agree with you. I wish he had resigned, but he didn’t and no one else did either, spilled milk.
I completely agree.
1. Why did Bush fire him and replace him with Condi?
2. Why wasn’t he a member of WHIG?
3. Who else in the WH, was less enthusiastic about it or quicker to criticize it?
Right now, I think Powell is a critical ally in helping get our troops OUT. Criticizing him for the fact that he is very far from perfect misses the point. We need Republicans to get us out. Vichy Dems, such as Ellen Tauscher, will listen to Powell. If you have evidence that Powell was as complicit as everyone else in the WH, I’m eager to see it. No one else from Bush’s previous Cabinet has done as much as Powell to criticize the WH policies on Iraq and the GWOT.
OT, next time you want to nail Powell, I suggest using the My Lai “whitewash” stuff.
I’m curious to know how many here think that chaos and escalation to regional conflict is actually the goal of some, including McCain
I won’t stop trying but I don’t think we can stop this impending train wreck.
FWIW Iraq
Slow LearnersStudy Group is the Baker Hamilton Commission, to rescue junior. The White House Iraq Group (WHIG) were those people charged with lying us into war.I do not want to be an Imperial and Colonizing Power.
What will it take for us to realize our sins?
My question is.. if the preznit persists in his folly, at what point do we get to end this whole thing and impeach him? .. if for no other reason than because a country consumed by a partisan impeachment can’t really do much damage in its foreign policy…
btw.. does anybody have the exact quote for the paraphrase below, from Dear Leader?.. this appeared in the Daily News:
“Bush last week told pals he expects to be better understood and appreciated after he is dead.”
Every once in a while St. John makes some progressive noise and fools us into believing he has a heart. Never for a minute ignore the fact that he is a hard line conservative and when it matters that is the way he goes. Time and time again he has lulled us with momentary lapses into liberal actions but they were insignificant in the “body of work” that is St. McCain.
Expect the worse from him and you will be well served.
P.S. glad you and the pups dodged the bullet Jane.
Somebody should tell Bush that “stop, drop and roll won’t help you in Hell”.
rumi @ 59..I think “it may be going according to the PNAC plan” may be correct. Very little is mentioned in the media about the 4-5 huge military bases being built in Iraq in and around the oil fields. The flaw with the plan, as pointed out by Steve Gilliard, is that when the whole country becomes hostile, the bases can’t be resupplied by road. The PNAC plan was drawn-up based on neo-con ideology and not military reality. It is, and will be a total fucking disaster.
Uh…sorry the correct phrase is: They broke it, we get to pay for it.
I hope Senator ‘SlimeBall’ McCain runs. He will have plenty of opportunity to explain his ‘Happy Birthday John’ moment to all the folks in this country that need the government to be competent.
He has no chance of winning. None.
Jeffrey Feldman (link in Jane’s piece above) asks Lord McCain:
“- By what evidence do you claim that the American people are confused?
- At what point did you become convinced that your view matters more than the views of those very people who elected you to office for the purpose of carrying out their will?
- By what right do you decide that the only opinion that matters in America is yours?”
I actually think it’s the other way around. His pattern has been for years (and, on the Hill, known to have been, among staffers) that he is willing to back all manner of independent, middle-of-the-road initiatives as long as he can deny that he did when the right calls him onto the carpet for it. John McCain is a man whose ambition to become president trumps his ability to think independently, and, in fact, his rationality or his decency.
fallenmonk @ 63
Pach is upstairs.
Steve @ 65
I agree. total disaster, but it will be a moneymaker for a few select groups. The chaos will cover for covert operations to run the PNAC in the shadows. Mercenaries will be well paid to povide security for the military bases and guard the US oil contracts.
The only thing that will have an affect on the American people to force pullout is massive US casualties in a short amount of time. I say that the only way to avoid that is to pull them out before the inevitable disaster happens.
egregious @
29
Wow, oil repository #1 and oil repository #3 go to war against each other on oil repository #2’s territory. Not good at all.
angie @
52
John Casper @ 58
I haven’t forgotten that, nor his role in the Reagan White House. :)
Everyday, John McCain prooves why he graduated last in his class.
Make that “proves”.
Yeah.. wouldn’t that be ironic? Bush 43, the American Petroleum Institute President, manages to single-handledly cut off global supply. ‘course that’s probably their most fervent wet dream… The only bright spot to come out of all this will be that President Gore will have the singular pleasure of nationalizing Exxon when they try to sell oil at $300 a barrel.
squiddy @ 71
Investment advice for the penumbra of the Bush regime: invest in bicycle manufacturers. Or a good horse.
egregious @ 22
So true. I’ve known many an infrantry man from wars starting with WWII to the present, and it’s a rare twisted mind that comes out of that hell eager to wish it on others, particularly for a war of choice.
Dangerous. McCain could actually be darker than the bushco team. We ignore these signs at our own peril.
blub @
76
Let’s try to see where this scenario would go:
Massive war between the three countries, which normally would fit nicely into the military/industrial complex’s love of selling hi-tech weapons to middle east atrocities. Problem is, (for the wingnuts) unlike the Iran/Iraq war, none of the participants would be investing in hi-tech methods of fighting it, and none of them would want to buy our stuff anyway. They’d buy it all from China or Russia.
Thoughts?
perris @
10
perris,
i have to disagree. bush has bought a lot, with our money and other people’s lives. we bought it alright. the only question now is, are we going to end further payments other than the ones which are inevitable and long term.
what bush hasn’t done is admit ownership, and he’s trying to give it to whoever becomes president in ‘09.
he may never admit it, even to himself, but colin powell’s admonition will haunt fuckwad until he’s dead and crispy.
Where is the 2008 candidate whose platform includes a well-thought-out way to significantly reduce our dependency on oil and lead the way to energy INdependence while having a plan to get out of Iraq? Sending more troops, as McCain advocates, should have been done in 2003. It’s too late for that now. Bring the men and women home.
The “Straighjacket Express” is on the rails again, following the tracks right to the heart of darkness.
The only thing adding more troops will do is add to the number of casualties. You do the math… The “Decider-in-Chief” and his love-monkey can’t, apparently.
The only good thing that may come of this is that it may derail Lord McCain’s (I wish I had thought of that) Presidency. When this fails, as we all know it will, he won’t be able to say, “I told you so,” about adding more troops.
Incidentally, the word “troop” in Russian means corpse.
Jodie Foster