John McCain: Everyone But "MoveOn" And "Liberals" Want Bush To Get No-Strings-Attached War Funding
Check out the statement John McCain uncorked this morning blasting Hillary and Barack Obama for voting yesterday against the no-withdrawal-timetables Iraq War funding bill:
"I was very disappointed to see Senator Obama and Senator Clinton embrace the policy of surrender by voting against funds to support our brave men and women fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan."This vote may win favor with MoveOn and liberal primary voters, but it's the equivalent of waving a white flag to al Qaeda."
Yep -- everybody except for MoveOn members and liberals wants Bush to get his war funding with no strings attached.
Oh, the mendacity, the mendacity!
Check out these numbers from the latest CBS/New York Times poll:
Which of these comes closest to your opinion? 1. Congress should block all funding for the war in Iraq no matter what; 2. Congress should allow funding, but only on the condition that the U.S. sets benchmarks for progress and the Iraqi government are meeting those goals; OR 3. Congress should allow all funding for the war without any benchmark conditions.Block all 13%
Fund with benchmarks 69%
Allow all 15%
So nearly 70% in the latest poll want the war funded on the explicit condition that the funding comes with benchmarks that the Iraqi government is meeting. In other words, a huge majority wants the funding of the war to be conditioned on the Iraqis meeting the benchmarks. Yesterday's bill doesn't have that provision.
Wow, so nearly 70% of the public are MoveOn members and liberals. Guess they're doing much better than anyone thought.
Update: I should add an even better piece of evidence contra McCain: Back when the Dems passed their initial supplemental with a withdrawal timetable, solid majorities supported this approach in every poll I saw. Hillary and Obama were reflecting the desires of solid majorities by voting against the bill yesterday. McCain is just makin' it up.
Update II: Ask and ye shall receive. Here are three polls showing solid majority support for withdrawal timetables before the veto.
And here's a post-veto poll showing a solid majority wanted Congress to send another bill back to the President with withdrawal timetables. And 61% supported sending a bill with real enforceable benchmarks -- again, which this bill didn't have.
So where is the poll question about funding with a timetable for withdrawal, which is what all the fuss is about? It seems everyone on this site is assuming that the vast majority of Americans want timetables, but I haven't seen any evidence of that. I would only hope it were true, but is it?
May 25, 2007 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
back when the Dems passed the initial timetables bill, solid majorities supported that approach in every poll
May 25, 2007 11:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
All the aboard the Delusional Express!
May 25, 2007 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, I agree with your update, I remember seeing those polls, but you should really provide examples.... otherwise you run the risk of looking like world net daily or something.
May 25, 2007 12:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
good idea, will do
May 25, 2007 12:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
And here's how Hillary and Obama can respond to McCain...that is, if he actually voted:
"This vote may win favor with the AEI and right-wing primary voters, but it's the equivalent of waving a white flag to reason, reality and the large majority of American people who want to get out of this mess."
May 25, 2007 12:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope he is right, it would mean about 76% of the country is NOW
LIBERAL. I like that idea.
May 25, 2007 12:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
okay, just added four polls for your enjoyment
May 25, 2007 12:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if Clinton and Obama had voted "yes," McCain's statement would have called them obstreperous Democrats who dragged out the funding debate, recklessly put the troops in harm's way, and distracted Congress from more important business for 3 months longer than necessary. See? We get it.
Greg, I truly love your reporting and analytical, intelligent mind (I'd vote for you if you were running), but this isn't news--it's just the same thing spouted over and over again till anyone with one working synapse can repeat it without prompting (see above). I'm too exhausted and dispirited over the passing of the capitulation bill to get worked up about what an irrelevant monster like George W. McCain says about two senators who made sure their votes were irrelevant before casting them. Can you find out the responses from entities who matter, like DCCC, MoveOn, DNC, etc.?
Oh, and incidentally, McCain is technically correct--only "Liberals" wanted the capitulation bill to be passed. As you undoubtedly realize, McCain and the other neocons have long-since redefined "Liberal" to mean "Everyone except the 28% who worship George Bush without thought or reservation." Until our spineless Democratic representatives use the power we gave them last November to take control of the terminology and the rhetoric and the debate, we're stuck with whatever the neocons foist off on us. It's a mighty bitter pill.
May 25, 2007 12:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I meant, "only 'liberals' DIDN'T want the capitulation bill to be passed." Clearly, I don't have one working synapse left after all...
May 25, 2007 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder how McCain's comments fly with the significant chunk of Republican voters who want timetables.
May 25, 2007 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is often said that there are a lot of Republicans waiting for a 'true conservative' candidate. That may be true, but I expect that there are a lot that would also like to see at least one moderate Republican candidate.
global citizen
May 25, 2007 1:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Circle the wagons! Hide the women and children! The liberals are coming!
May 25, 2007 1:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
McCain has been increasingly uncorked lately. Today's statements show that he uncorked another bottle of Bush's 151 proof Kool-Aid.
May 25, 2007 1:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't McCain know though, that Bush said that if Iraq asks us to wave the white flag to al-Qaeda, we'll do so?
May 25, 2007 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
yeah, and didn't a majority of iraqi elected officials recently ask us to wave that white flag?
May 25, 2007 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
That may be true, but I expect that there are a lot that would also like to see at least one moderate Republican candidate.
These days, they'll have to look at the Dem candidates to find a moderate Republican to vote for.
May 25, 2007 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good. The more he says stuff like this, the more people will self-identify with liberals and, consequently, democrats. Once again, the Democratic Party is the party of the people.
Question is: Will people remember that fact if/when there's another terrorist attack? My guess is "no".
May 25, 2007 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Know what this means?
It means that the Dubya campaign of 2000 was correct in saying McCain is a mental case.
At least they got one thing correct, eh?
May 25, 2007 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Unless those 13% are all members of A.N.S.W.E.R.?
May 25, 2007 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Statement to McCain:
Senator McCain not only falsely leads the American public about how violent Iraq has become under the policies he has whole hearted supported in his voting record since he voted for the authorization to attack Iraq based on deceitful handpicked intelligence, he also is not forthcoming to the american public in his present judgement. He strolls under the protection of war machines and calls it a peaceful journey. Is that honest? Or is it manipulated and staged? He does not understand that the majority of Americans want to withdrawal from Iraq on benchmarks that have the consequences of timetables for promised progress that has not been acheived under republican control. His deceit that some unidentified enemy will attack us in the homeland if we do not annihilate that enemy in Iraq is another fear mongering tactic by the republican party in which the true victims are our brave soldiers and their families and mostly the Iraqi people which we have put in even more danger by this republican surge. Like Lyndon Johnson who also was under the illusion that communists would attack the homeland if we withdrew from Vietnam, John McCain embraces more war and destruction in the name of peace and liberty.
Some people don't learn from history, others choose not to listen to history. Both are certainly doomed to repeat it. Let us focus on who the real enemy is, how to stop this enemy. Let's provide a plan that will help Iraqis step up in Unity against the chaos which has resulted from McCain and Bush's continued failed policies. Why is diplomacy combined with a plan for the Iraqis to step up militarily in the next year a white flag? It is not. The democratic party is committed to fighting Al quaida just as much as much as the republican party is, but we must approach this enemy more selectively to not get caught up in a civil war. The new approach must be done with better american leadership and better intelligence. Bush's failure to bring diplomacy is a common characteristic to almost every aspect of this administration. We, the people, have demanded change last November. We will continue to do so, because Bush has tried to confuse the publicby claiming that more war equates to change. Is that the change the American people demanded? That's not what the newly elected majority says. That's not what the polls say, that's not what I say. More war is just more of the same failed policy, which is exactly why the situation in Iraq is what it is. We need change in leadership to bring a new policy to bring change on the ground. John McCain is not providing either.
May 25, 2007 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink