Saturday, January 19, 2008

Bush-Lite McCain

John McCain, the Bush-Lite Neocon

Our Senator, John McCain wants to Bomb, Bomb and Bomb other nations and entangle our Armed forces for another 100 years. He bases that on false information, just as he did with the Iraq invasion. Yet there is no apologies.

Our lies and our presence in Iraq has caused this much horror;

Number of Iraqis Slaughtered In U.S. War on Iraq 1,168,058

Number of U.S. Military Personnel Sacrificed in U.S. War and Occupation 3,926

Cost of U.S. War and Occupation of Iraq $486,769,250,980

2 Million Iraqis have been chased out to seek a safe heaven

Half a Million Women are out on the streets with no jobs and no one to support and they may resort to flesh trade bringing immorality and carrying viruses.

John McCain has repeatedly said this for the last two weeks. “I’ll get Osama bin Laden. I’ll get him even if I have to follow him to the gates of hell” and he has been repeating this from the New Hampshire Primaries, all the way to Nevada and now South Carolina.

Senator McCain, did you not betray America?
Senator, then why did you not get Osama?
Why do you have to wait to be elected to do that?
Isn’t that a betrayal to your party and to your President?
Isn’t that a betrayal to our nation?

Senator, what you and your Neocon buddies do not understand is the simple formula of peace: We cannot have peace when we chaos surrounds us. Your irresponsible statements cause much resentment and hatred around the globe. I guess you don't give a damn, if that hatred you sow, becomes the reason to mistreat our soldiers, like the tragic mis-treatment you suffered. I hope you learn a lesson to nurture Geneva conventions. You do not have the courtesy to apologize your bombing statements, even after you found out it was another manufacture of our administration to create Chaos. Do we need you to be another Bush-Lite?

Rewarding this rhetoric is robbing America with another Trillion dollars; while 45 Million of Americans go without health care costing billions of dollars in loss of productivity, while those who have served in wars come home depressed and not live a full life besides killing another million of other humans and thousands of our own.

John McCain is good for defense industry investors and oil companies and he is no good for America. Think about the candidates who want to save lives, save the nation from deficit and spend their energy and put our name for peace making. It is cheaper and more productive to work for peace than Bomb, Bomb and Bomb.

Say no to any candidate who wants to ruin our country with recklessness.


In a message dated 1/19/2008 10:09:21 A.M. writes:

McCain and his admiral Father helped to cover-up the treacherous Israeli attack on the USS Liberty as well:


The Hundred-Year War / McCain wants us in Iraq permanently

### writes:

McCain as a veteran of the Viet Nam War should indeed know better - God's curse and vengeance will be on America IF McCain - or Hillary or Rudy - is elected President.

Kristol - being the Zionist Jew supporter of Israel and TRAITOR to the US - does indeed see the destruction of Iraq as 'victory' for Israel - and it is!

A war fought against a country's population can NOT be won.

We did NOT 'win' the Viet Nam War - and - we lost our soul in the process.

As a veteran of the Viet Nam War myself - I served aboard the USS Oriskany in 1966, the year before McCain was shot down flying off the Mighty O - I agree with Lee and Sherman:

"War is all HELL" - Sherman

"It is good that war is so terrible less we grow too fond of it" - Lee

McCain indeed should know better!


So This Is Victory, Mr. Kristol?
By Joe Conason

This article appears in the January 21, 2008, edition of The New York Observer.
As America marks the first anniversary of the troop escalation in Iraq, at least one thing has become clear. Although the “surge” is failing as policy, it seems to be succeeding as propaganda. Even as George W. Bush continues to bump and scrape along the bottom of public approval, significantly more people now believe that we are “winning” the war.

What winning really means and whether that vague impression can be sustained are questions that the war’s proponents would prefer not to answer for the moment. Their objective during this election year is simply to reduce public pressure for withdrawal, which is still the choice of an overwhelming majority of voters.

So long as the surge appears to be working, political space is created for the Republican candidates who support the war—especially Senator John McCain, the hawk’s hawk, who said recently that he, might keep U.S. soldiers in Iraq for “a hundred years.” Although that remark was not well received in the Arab world, they may have taken comfort in the fact that no matter how determined the Arizona senator is to carry out that threat, he is unlikely to do so since he is already over 70 years old.

But the revival of Mr. McCain’s moribund candidacy over the past few weeks would have been impossible without the media’s endorsement of “progress” in Iraq. Indeed, war propaganda itself has surged lately on the strength of casualty statistics from December 2007. Consider the work of William Kristol, the indefatigable publicist who played an important role in selling the war as editor of The Weekly Standard and on the Fox News Channel. From his new perch on The New York Times’ Op-Ed page—which proves that being hideously wrong is no obstacle to scaling the heights of American punditry—he proclaims that “we have been able to turn around the situation in Iraq” and achieved “real success.”

According to Mr. Kristol, who once mocked concerns about religious strife in Iraq as “pop sociology,” the drop in violence last month may have marked the lowest overall number of deaths for both civilians and military forces since the war began, in March 2003. Declining casualties for a month or two means progress, which in turn means that the war must continue, and that the president’s policy is correct.

What has fallen far more sharply than the casualty statistics in Iraq is the standard for success there, as defined by neoconservatives like Mr. Kristol. In the original promotional literature produced by them and their associates, and recited by the president, this war was supposed to remake the Middle East into a showcase for democracy, with ruinous consequences for our terrorist enemies, cheaper oil for us—and all for free because the Iraqi petroleum industry would cover all the costs.

When that happy future never arrived, to put it very mildly, the war’s proponents scrambled to reduce expectations. So when the president announced the surge, he set forth a series of benchmarks for progress in Iraq that were supposed to result from our increased troop presence. The objective was not a temporary reduction of sectarian killing but real movement toward reconciliation of the contending factions, including the passage of laws on sharing oil revenues and political power among the Sunni, Shia, Kurdish and other communities. President Bush declared that the escalation would create space for the Iraqis to act on behalf of their own country.

Even those minimized objectives have yet to be met. The oil-sharing statute is stalled in the Iraqi parliament while Kurdish regional authorities make their own separate deals with foreign oil companies. The Sunni militia organizations that we have armed to fight Al Qaeda have been rejected by the Shia central government. The statute passed by the Iraqi parliament last week to reduce sanctions against former members of the Ba’ath Party, which was supposed to mollify the Sunni leadership, appears only to have alienated them further because they consider it fraudulent.

Worst of all, despite the undoubted courage and commitment of our troops, the level of violence in Iraq has increased since the New Year began. Killings of civilians by car bombs and snipers averaged more than 50 per day during the first two weeks of January, and U.S. military deaths are averaging slightly more than one per day, or nearly 50 percent higher than last month.
At that level, if American troops stayed for another 10 years, let alone a century as Mr. McCain suggests, our casualties would double. What would winning mean then?

Joe Conason is national correspondent for the New York Observer, where he writes a weekly column distributed by Creators Syndicate. He is also a columnist for, and the Director of the Nation Institute Investigative Fund. His latest book, It Can Happen Here: Authoritarian Peril in the Age of Bush was released in February 2007. His writing and reporting have appeared in many publications, including Harpers, the Guardian, The Nation, and The New Republic.
This article can be viewed online at:

Write your comments to:
In the subject line please write :: John McCain the Bush-Lite

Mike Ghouse is a Speaker, Thinker, Writer and a Moderator. He is a frequent guest on talk radio and local television network discussing Pluralism, politics, Islam, Religion, Terrorism, India and civic issues. His comments, news analysis, opinions and columns can be found on the Websites and Blogs listed at his personal website He can be reached at or (214) 325-1916

No comments:

Post a Comment