The WAWG Blog

Vandals Cut Brake Lines on Cars of Liberal Supporters – Toronto police patrolled a midtown area overnight, after vandals cut brake lines on at least 10 cars parked at homes with Liberal election signs on their lawns. “We’re investigating. Officers are paying special attention to the designated area and we take this very seriously,” Staff-Sgt. Shawn Meloche, from 53 Division, said last night. “This is a danger to life as well as to property. Regardless of the motivation – and there appears to be a connection (to the signs) – this is a public safety issue.” The cars were also damaged in other ways; some were scratched and keyed with L signs. Phone and cable lines of some homes were cut.

Florida Teacher Uses ‘N’ Word Against Obama – A 7th grade teacher, Greg Howard, asked his students what “change” stood for in relation to the Obama campaign and proceeded to write out the acronym “come help a nigger get elected.”

US Officials Stopped Plans to Kill bin Laden According to Delta Force Officer – Bin Laden was known to be holed up at Tora Bora on a ridge with an elevation of 14,000 feet. The Delta Force team’s initial plan was to come at him from the direction he’d least expect, climbing over the mountains at his back, but that plan wasn’t approved by the higher-ups. Their second idea, to drop hundreds of landmines along the mountain passes to Pakistan to impede bin Laden’s retreat and then bring in helicopters, was also turned down.

“How often does Delta come up with a tactical plan that’s disapproved by higher headquarters?” CBS’s Scott Pelley asked the commando leader.

“In my experience, in my five years at Delta, never before,” he replied.

Lehman’s Golden Parachutes Were Being Secured While Execs Were Pleading For Federal Rescue – Days from becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, Lehman Brothers steered millions to departing executives even while pleading for a federal rescue, Congress was told Monday. As well, executives who feared for their bonuses in the company’s last months were told not to worry, according to documents cited at a congressional hearing. One executive said he was embarrassed when employees suggested that Lehman executives forgo bonuses, and cracked: “I’m not sure what’s in the water.”

Regards,

Jim
Will you listen to your hopes or your fears?

Does Obama almost always vote with his party?
The Statement: Gov. Sarah Palin said at the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate that Sen. Barack Obama has “pretty much only voted along his party lines. In fact, 96 percent of his votes have been solely along party line.”
Verdict: True. Congressional Quarterly examined Obama’s votes in the Senate. According to the analysis, Obama has indeed voted with the Democratic Party 96 percent of the time. But this means that Obama voted against the ideology that got us into all these messes.

Is Obama willing to meet with Iran’s Ahmadinejad?
The Statement: Gov. Sarah Palin said at the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate that Sen. Barack Obama “would be willing to meet with” Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad “without preconditions being met first.”
Verdict: Misleading. While Obama has said he wouldn’t rule out meeting with any foreign leader, he never specifically said he’d meet with the Iranian president.

Did Afghan general say ‘surge principle’ won’t work?
The Statement: Sen. Joe Biden said at the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate that “our commanding general in Afghanistan said the surge principle in Iraq will not work in Afghanistan.”
Verdict: True. Gen. David McKiernan, the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, was quoted on Oct. 2 in The Washington Post as saying that “no Iraq-style ‘surge’ of forces will end the conflict” in Afghanistan, even though more U.S. troops are needed to take on a growing insurgency. “Afghanistan is not Iraq,” McKiernan said in Washington on Oct. 1. He also said “the word I don’t use for Afghanistan is ‘surge.’ ” He called for a “sustained commitment” leading to a political and not just a military solution. (And Palin got the name of the General wrong in her response.)

Is it true Obama ‘still can’t admit the surge works’?
The Statement: During the vice-presidential debate in St. Louis on Thursday, Oct. 2, Republican nominee Gov. Sarah Palin criticized Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Obama’s opposition to the military “surge” in Iraq and said, “The surge worked. Barack Obama still can’t admit the surge works.”
Verdict: False. Obama has said the surge “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams” from a military perspective.

Did Palin cut taxes in Alaska?
The Verdict: True, but incomplete. She cut some taxes in both posts, but raised others.

Does McCain want to deregulate health care?
The Statement: During the vice presidential debate on Oct. 2, Democratic nominee Joe Biden described Republican presidential nominee John McCain as a long-time supporter of deregulation of the banking industry and added, “As a matter of fact, John recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do for the health care industry (is) deregulate it and let the free market move like he did for the banking industry.”
Verdict: Misleading. In the current issue of a magazine for the American Academy of Actuaries, McCain discussed a change he wants to bring to the health care market: allowing people to buy plans across state lines. “Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation,” he wrote in the magazine called “Contingencies.” McCain does want to overhaul state oversight of health care, but the deregulation he is calling for is not nearly as extensive as what was done to the banking system. (How much, if any, would be good?)

Did Obama vote to cut funds for troops?
The Statement: At an Oct. 2 debate in St. Louis, Missouri, Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin was talking about support for U.S. troops overseas. “I know that the other ticket opposed this surge — in fact, even opposed funding our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Barack Obama voted against funding troops after promising that he would not do so,” she said.
Verdict: Misleading. Obama supported a different version of the troop-funding plan — one that McCain spoke against.

Did Sen. Joe Biden say raising taxes is ‘patriotic’?
The Statement: Gov. Sarah Palin, speaking at the vice presidential debate on Oct. 2, asserted that Sen. Joe Biden recently said “higher taxes or asking for higher taxes or paying for higher taxes is patriotic.”
The Verdict: Misleading. Biden actually said those who earn more than $250,000 a year during an Obama administration would pay more in taxes that would be used to help the middle class.

Is Obama proposing $860 billion+ in new spending?
The Statement: At a campaign stop Monday in Columbus, Ohio, Sen. John McCain said Sen. Barack Obama “has proposed more than $860 billion in new spending.”
Verdict: Misleading. The figure McCain gave is based on his campaign’s tally of the costs of numerous programs Obama has discussed, but ignores the savings from other policy changes Obama is calling for.

Did Obama vote 94 times for higher taxes?
The Statement: At a debate Thursday, Oct. 2 in St. Louis, Missouri, Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin charged Democrat Sen. Barack Obama of supporting higher taxes. “Barack had 94 opportunities to side on the people’s side and reduce taxes, and 94 times he voted to increase taxes or not support a tax reduction — 94 times.”
Verdict: Misleading. Palin’s summary ignores the fact that some of the votes were for measures to lower taxes for many Americans, while increasing them for a much smaller number of taxpayers. The total also includes multiple votes on the same measures and budget votes that would not directly lead to higher taxes.

Do Obama and Biden oppose ‘clean coal?’
The Statement: At a debate Thursday, Oct. 2 in St. Louis, Missouri, Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin charged that Sen. Joe Biden, is against “clean coal” technology.
Verdict: Misleading. The partial Biden quotes but leave out the full context of his comments. The Obama campaign supports “clean coal” technology and building plants using the new technology.

Did Obama help take power from lobbyists?
The Statement: Sen. Barack Obama, speaking at campaign event on September 30 in Reno, Nevada, said he would make health care and financial reforms. “And I will take power away from the corporate lobbyists who think they can stand in the way of these reforms” he said. “I’ve done it in Illinois, I’ve done it in Washington and I will do it again as president.”
Verdict: True. Obama has supported and helped shape legislation cracking down on all lobbyists.
Summary: I leave as an exercise for the reader to count up the misleading statements by each side. More examples :

Palin’s Critique of Dick Cheney – As part of Katie Couric’s interview series with both VP candidates, Palin and Joe Biden were asked to name the best and worst things that Cheney has done over the last eight years. The responses stood in stark contrast, to say the least.

Biden offered a withering critique of Cheney, charging that he had “done more harm than any other single elected official in my memory in terms of shredding the Constitution,” citing the vice president’s promotion of “torture as a policy” and the idea of the unitary executive.

Palin’s response: “Worst thing, I guess, that woulda been the duck hunting accident, where, you know, that was, that was an accident. And that was made into a caricature of him, and that was kind of unfortunate.”

Palin’s Debate Responses
“I’ll betcha”
“Bless their hearts”
“Darn right”
“Now, doggone it”

Does Sarah Palin realize we are choosing the future leadership of our country and not casting the lead for Annie get your gun?

Regards,

Jim
Will you listen to your hopes or your fears?

McCain’s Miserable Record of Not Supporting America’s Troops and Veterans

McCain Voting Against Veterans
Veterans Groups Give McCain Failing Grades. In its most recent legislative ratings, the non-partisan Disabled American Veterans gave Sen. McCain a 20 percent rating for his voting record on veterans’ issues. Similarly, the non-partisan Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America gave McCain a “D” grade for his poor voting record on veterans’ issues, including McCain’s votes against additional body armor for troops in combat and additional funding for PTSD and TBI screening and treatment.

McCain Voted Against Increased Funding for Veterans’ Health Care. Although McCain told voters at a campaign rally that improving veterans’ health care was his top domestic priority, he voted against increasing funding for veterans’ health care in 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007. (Greenville News, 12/12/2007; S.Amdt. 2745 to S.C.R. 95, Vote 40, 3/10/04; Senate S.C.R. 18, Vote 55, 3/16/05; S.Amdt. 3007 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 41, 3/14/06; H.R. 1591, Vote 126, 3/29/07)

McCain Voted At Least 28 Times Against Veterans’ Benefits, Including Healthcare. Since arriving in the U.S. Senate in 1987, McCain has voted at least 28 times against ensuring important benefits for America’s veterans, including providing adequate healthcare. (2006 Senate Vote #7, 41, 63, 67, 98, 222; 2005 Senate Votes #55, 89, 90, 251, 343; 2004 Senate Votes #40, 48, 145; 2003 Senate Votes #74, 81, 83; 1999 Senate Vote #328; 1998 Senate Vote #175; 1997 Senate Vote #168; 1996 Senate Votes #115, 275; 1995 Senate Votes #76, 226, 466; 1994 Senate Vote #306; 1992 Senate Vote #194; 1991 Senate Vote #259)

McCain Voted Against Providing Automatic Cost-of-Living Adjustments to Veterans. McCain voted against providing automatic annual cost-of-living adjustments for certain veterans’ benefits. (S. 869, Vote 259, 11/20/91)

McCain Voted to Underfund Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted for an appropriations bill that underfunded the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development by $8.9 billion. (H.R. 2099, Vote 470, 9/27/95)

• McCain Voted Against a $13 Billion Increase in Funding for Veterans Programs. McCain voted against an amendment to increase spending on veterans programs by $13 billion. (S.C.R. 57, Vote 115, 5/16/96)
• McCain Voted Against $44.3 Billion for Veterans Programs. McCain was one of five senators to vote against a bill providing $44.3 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, plus funding for other federal agencies. (H.R. 2684, Vote 328, 10/15/99)
• McCain Voted Against $47 Billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain was one of eight senators to vote against a bill that provided $47 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs. (H.R. 4635, Vote 272, 10/12/00)
• McCain Voted Against $51 Billion in Veterans Funding. McCain was one of five senators to vote against the bill and seven to vote against the conference report that provided $51.1 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, as well as funding for the federal housing, environmental and emergency management agencies and NASA. (H.R. 2620, Vote 334, 11/8/01; Vote 269, 8/2/01)
• McCain Voted Against $122.7 Billion for Department of Veterans Affairs. McCain voted against an appropriations bill that included $122.7 billion in fiscal 2004 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, Housing and Urban Development and other related agencies. (H.R. 2861, Vote 449, 11/12/03)
• McCain Opposed $500 Million for Counseling Services for Veterans with Mental Disorders. McCain voted against an amendment to appropriate $500 million annually from 2006-2010 for counseling, mental health and rehabilitation services for veterans diagnosed with mental illness, posttraumatic stress disorder or substance abuse. (S. 2020, S.Amdt. 2634, Vote 343, 11/17/05)
• McCain opposed an Assured Funding Stream for Veterans’ Health Care. McCain opposed providing an assured funding stream for veterans’ health care, taking into account annual changes in veterans’ population and inflation. (S.Amdt. 3141 to S.C.R. 83, Vote 63, 3/16/06)
• McCain Voted Against Adding More Than $400 Million for Veterans’ Care. McCain was one of 13 Republicans to vote against providing an additional $430 million to the Department of Veterans Affairs for outpatient care and treatment for veterans. (S.Amdt. 3642 to H.R. 4939, Vote 98, 4/26/06)
• McCain Supported Outsourcing VA Jobs. McCain opposed an amendment that would have prevented the Department of Veterans Affairs from outsourcing jobs, many held by blue-collar veterans, without first giving the workers a chance to compete. (S.Amdt. 2673 to H.R. 2642, Vote 315, 9/6/07)
• McCain Opposed the 21st Century GI Bill Because It Was Too Generous. McCain did not vote on the GI Bill that will provide better educational opportunities to veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, paying full tuition at in-state schools and living expenses for those who have served at least three years since the 9/11 attacks. McCain said he opposes the bill because he thinks the generous benefits would “encourage more people to leave the military.” (S.Amdt. 4803 to H.R. 2642, Vote 137, 5/22/08; Chattanooga Times Free Press, 6/2/08; Boston Globe, 5/23/08; ABCNews.com, 5/26/08)
• Disabled American Veterans Legislative Director Said That McCain’s Proposal Would Increase Costs For Veterans Because His Plan Relies On Private Hospitals Which Are More Expensive and Which Could Also Lead To Further Rationing Of Care. “To help veterans who live far from VA hospitals or need specialized care the VA can’t provide, McCain proposed giving low-income veterans and those who incurred injury during their service a card they could use at private hospitals. The proposal is not an attempt to privatize the VA, as critics have alleged, but rather, an effort to improve care and access to it, he said. Joe Violanti, legislative director of the Disabled American Veterans, a nonpartisan organization, said the proposal would increase costs because private hospitals are more expensive. The increased cost could lead to further rationing of care, he said.” (Las Vegas Sun, 8/10/08)

McCain’s Lack of Support for the Troops
McCain co-sponsored the Use of Force Authorization. McCain supported the bill that gave President George W. Bush the green light–and a blank check–for going to war with Iraq. (SJ Res 46, 10/3/02)

McCain Opposed Increasing Spending on TRICARE and Giving Greater Access to National Guard and Reservists. Although his campaign website devotes a large section to veterans issues, including expanding benefits for reservists and members of the National Guard, McCain voted against increasing spending on the TRICARE program by $20.3 billion over 10 years to give members of the National Guard and Reserves and their families greater access to the health care program. The increase would be offset by a reduction in tax cuts for the wealthy. (S.Amdt. 324 to S.C.R. 23, Vote 81, 3/25/03)

McCain voted against holding Bush accountable for his actions in the war. McCain opposed the creation of an independent commission to investigate the development and use of intelligence leading up to the war in Iraq. (S.Amdt. 1275 to H.R. 2658, Vote 284, 7/16/03)

McCain voted Against Establishing a $1 Billion Trust Fund for Military Health Facilities. McCain voted against establishing a $1 billion trust fund to improve military health facilities by refusing to repeal tax cuts for those making more than $1 million a year. (S.Amdt. 2735 to S.Amdt. 2707 to H.R. 4297, Vote 7, 2/2/06)

Senator McCain opposed efforts to end the overextension of the military–a policy that is having a devastating impact on our troops. McCain voted against requiring mandatory minimum downtime between tours of duty for troops serving in Iraq. (S.Amdt.. 2909 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 341, 9/19/07; S.Amdt. 2012 to S.Amdt. 2011 to HR 1585, Vote 241, 7/11/07)

McCain announced his willingness to keep U.S. troops in Iraq for decades–a statement sure to inflame Iraqis and endanger American troops. McCain: “Make it a hundred” years in Iraq and “that would be fine with me.” (Derry, New Hampshire Town Hall meeting, 1/3/08)

McCain voted against a ban on waterboarding–a form of torture–in a move that could eventually endanger American troops. According to ThinkProgress, “the Senate brought the Intelligence Authorization Bill to the floor, which contained a provision from Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) establishing one interrogation standard across the government. The bill requires the intelligence community to abide by the same standards as articulated in the Army Field Manual and bans waterboarding.” McCain voted against the bill. (H.R. 2082, Vote 22, 2/13/08)

McCain Also Supported Outsourcing at Walter Reed. McCain opposed an amendment to prevent the outsourcing of 350 federal employee jobs at Walter Reed Army Medical Center–outsourcing that contributed to the scandalous treatment of veterans at Walter Reed that McCain called a “disgrace.” (S.Amdt. 4895 to H.R. 5631, Vote 234, 9/6/06; Speech to VFW in Kansas City, Mo., 4/4/08)

Senator McCain has consistently opposed any plan to withdraw troops from Iraq–a policy that has directly weakened American efforts in Afghanistan. Senator McCain repeatedly voted against a timetable for withdrawing troops from Iraq. (S.Amdt. 3876 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #438, 12/18/07; S.Amdt. 3875 to S.Amdt. 3874 to H.R. 2764, Vote #437, 12/18/07; S.Amdt.3164 to H.R. 3222, Vote #362, 10/3/07; S.Amdt. 2898 to S. Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #346, 9/21/07; S. Amdt. 2924 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R.1585, Vote #345, 9/21/07; S.Amdt.2 087 to S.Amdt. 2011 to H.R. 1585, Vote #252, 7/18/07; S.Amdt. 643 to H.R. 1591, Vote #116, 3/27/07; S.Amdt. 4320 to S. 2766, Vote #182, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 4442 to S. 2766, Vote #181, 6/22/06; S.Amdt. 2519 to S.1042, Vote #322, 11/15/05)

McCain said it’s “not too important” when U.S. troops leave Iraq. This exchange occurred on NBC’s Today Show with Matt Lauer:
LAUER: If it’s working, senator, do you now have a better estimate of when American forces can come home from Iraq?
McCAIN: No, but that’s not too important.
McCain Cheerleading for War with Iraq–While Afghanistan was Unfinished
McCain suggested that the war in Iraq could be won with a “smaller” force. “But the fact is I think we could go in with much smaller numbers than we had to do in the past. But I don’t believe it’s going to be nearly the size and scope that it was in 1991.” (CBS News, Face the Nation, 9/15/02)

McCain said winning the war would be “easy.” “I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women.” (CNN, 9/24/02)

McCain also said the actual fighting in Iraq would be easy. “We’re not going to get into house-to-house fighting in Baghdad. We may have to take out buildings, but we’re not going to have a bloodletting of trading American bodies for Iraqi bodies.” (CNN, 9/29/02)

Continuing his pattern, McCain also said on MSNBC that we would win the war in Iraq “easily.” “But the point is that, one, we will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” (MSNBC, 1/22/03)

McCain argued Saddam was “a threat of the first order.” Senator McCain said that a policy of containing Iraq to blunt its weapons of mass destruction program is “unsustainable, ineffective, unworkable and dangerous.” McCain: “I believe Iraq is a threat of the first order, and only a change of regime will make Iraq a state that does not threaten us and others, and where liberated people assume the rights and responsibilities of freedom.” (Speech to the Center for Strategic & International Studies, 2/13/03)

McCain echoed Bush and Cheney’s rationale for going to war. McCain: “We’re going to win this victory. Tragically, we will lose American lives. But it will be brief. We’re going to find massive evidence of weapons of mass destruction . . . It’s going to send the message throughout the Middle East that democracy can take hold in the Middle East.” (Fox News, Hannity & Colmes, 2/21/03)

“But I believe, Katie, that the Iraqi people will greet us as liberators.” (NBC, 3/20/03)

March 2003: “I believe that this conflict is still going to be relatively short.” (NBC, Meet the Press, 3/30/03)

McCain echoed Bush and Cheney’s talking points that the U.S. would only be in Iraq for a short time. McCain: “It’s clear that the end is very much in sight . . . It won’t be long . . . it’ll be a fairly short period of time.” (ABC, 4/9/03)

McCain’s Staunch Defense of the Iraq Invasion
McCain maintained that the war was a good idea and that George W. Bush deserved “admiration.” At the 2004 Republican National Convention, McCain, focusing on the war in Iraq, said that while weapons of mass destruction were not found, Saddam once had them and “he would have acquired them again.” McCain said the mission in Iraq “gave hope to people long oppressed” and it was “necessary, achievable and noble.” McCain: “For his determination to undertake it, and for his unflagging resolve to see it through to a just end, President Bush deserves not only our support, but our admiration.” (Speech, Republican National Convention, 8/31/04)

Senator McCain: “The war, the invasion was not a mistake. (Meet the Press, 1/6/08)

McCain said the war in Iraq was “worth” it. Asked if the war was a good idea worth the price in blood and treasure, McCain: “It was worth getting rid of Saddam Hussein. He had used weapons of mass destruction, and it’s clear that he was hell-bent on acquiring them.” (Republican Debate, 1/24/08)

McCain’s Dangerous Lack of Foreign Policy Knowledge
When questioned about Osama bin Laden after the 1998 U.S. missile strikes in Afghanistan, McCain surmised that the terrorist leader wasn’t as “bad” as “depicted.” “You could say, Look, is this guy, Laden, really the bad guy that’s depicted? Most of us have never heard of him before.” (Interview with Mother Jones magazine, 11/1998)
McCain was unaware of previous Sunni-Shia violence before the Iraq War. “There’s not a history of clashes that are violent between Sunnis and Shias. So I think they can probably get along.” (MSNBC, Hardball, 4/23/03)

McCain said our military could just “muddle through” in Afghanistan. While giving a speech, McCain was asked about Afghanistan and replied, “I am concerned about it, but I’m not as concerned as I am about Iraq today, obviously, or I’d be talking about Afghanistan. But I believe that if Karzai can make the progress that he is making, that in the long term, we may muddle through in Afghanistan.” (Speech to the Council on Foreign Relations, 11/5/03)

McCain stated that Sunni al Qaeda was “supported” by the Shia Iranians. (2/2008)

McCain again confused Sunni Muslim al Qaeda operatives with Shi’a Muslim insurgents. The Washington Post reported of McCain: “He said several times that Iran, a predominately Shiite country, was supplying the mostly Sunni militant group, al-Qaeda. In fact, officials have said they believe Iran is helping Shiite extremists in Iraq.

“Speaking to reporters in Amman, the Jordanian capital, McCain said he and two Senate colleagues traveling with him continue to be concerned about Iranian operatives ‘taking al-Qaeda into Iran, training them and sending them back.’

“Pressed to elaborate, McCain said it was ‘common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that’s well known. And it’s unfortunate.'” (Press conference, Amman, Jordan, 3/18/2008)

Yet again, McCain demonstrated that he didn’t know whether al Qaeda was a Sunni or Shiite organization. While questioning General David Petraeus during a Senate hearing, the following exchange occurred:

MCCAIN: Do you still view al Qaeda in Iraq as a major threat?
PETRAEUS: It is still a major threat, though it is certainly not as major a threat as it was say 15 months ago.
MCCAIN: Certainly not an obscure sect of the Shi’ites overall?
PETREAUS: No.
MCCAIN: Or Sunnis or anybody else. (Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing, 4/8/08)

McCain incorrectly thought General David Petraeus was in charge of Afghanistan. The Army Times reported: “Speaking Monday at the annual meeting of the Associated Press, McCain was asked whether he, if elected, would shift combat troops from Iraq to Afghanistan to intensify the search for al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden.

‘I would not do that unless Gen. [David] Petraeus said that he felt that the situation called for that,’ McCain said, referring to the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

“Petraeus, however, made clear last week that he has nothing to do with the decision. Testifying last week before four congressional committees, including the Senate Armed Services Committee on which McCain is the ranking Republican, Petraeus said the decision about whether troops could be shifted from Iraq to Afghanistan was not his responsibility because his portfolio is limited to the multi-national force in Iraq.” (Annual meeting of the Associated Press, 4/14/08)

McCain credited the “surge” for the “Anbar Awakening”–even though the Anbar Awakening preceded the surge by nearly a year. (7/22/08)

John McCain has also recently demonstrated either serious knowledge gaps in terms of foreign policy, or mounting confusion, when discussing an array of other countries:

Spain: McCain refused to commit to meeting with the president of Spain, a NATO ally, after becoming confused about America’s relationship with Spain, its leader, and, possibly, exactly where Spain is located. (9/17/08)

Czech Republic and Slovakia: McCain referred to the two countries using the name “Czechoslovakia” several times–despite the fact that Czechoslakia split apart and hasn’t existed since 1993. (7/15/08; (7/14/08))

Venezuela: McCain said that Venezuela was a Middle Eastern country. (9/30/08)

Regards,

Jim
Will you listen to your hopes or your fears?

The draft letter below was submitted to readers of the H-NET List for Discussion of Women & the Military and Women in War on 9/9/2008. I think the process used to select Palin, as compared to the process described below, shows that McCain is either not a good “captain” or he is not really in charge of his campaign.

Either way, Senator McCain is no longer qualified to be our next Commander In Chief.

I’ve been following the Palin thread with interest. Below is an oped that will be published in my local paper within the week. The Palin selection demands very serious discussions among the electorate, given the National Security implications.

Warm regards,
Beth Coye
•••••••••••••••••••
An Unpublished Oped/DRAFT
President Sarah Palin — Commander-in-Chief
by Beth F. Coye,
Commander, U.S. Navy (ret.)

Senator McCain constantly describes himself as a military man who always places “Country First”. Unfortunately, his first
big decision as a presidential nominee puts “Risky Decision-making First” and “Country Second.”

As a woman who served my country as a naval officer for twenty-one years and taught American Government and International Relations at several universities, I am astonished by John McCain’s vice presidential choice, Governor Sarah Palin. Palin, who governs .2% of the U.S. population, has neither foreign policy experience nor knowledge of international leaders and countries.

Let’s put McCain’s decision in a military context: Captain John McCain, a retired naval officer, understands our military personnel system. Would he thrust someone who is the commanding officer of a small shore-based unit and who has no seagoing experience into the position of executive officer of a Navy carrier, or VicettChairman of the Joint Chiefs? These top military jobs directly compare with one of the two highest offices in our political system.

The military’s personnel system never allows a Navy lieutenant to fill an admiral’s billet, or an Army/Air Force/Marine captain to fill a general’s billet; our political system, however, permits presidential nominees to select anyone they want as a running mate — whether or not the person has the requisite skill sets or experience.

Let us remind ourselves that, in the tradition of U.S. civil-military relations, the Constitution names the President as Commander-in-Chief. I find it unthinkable that someone with Sarah Palin’s minimal resume might someday be president or actingtpresident and be called upon to approve or disapprove recommendations by our most senior military officers (e.g., the Unified Commanders or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs). Sarah Palin has likely rarely read an NIE (National Intelligence Estimate)!

I have worked hard since the late ’60s for the rights of women in the U.S. military and in America and I believe Sarah Palin’s nomination insults women who have fought for equality and fairness in job opportunities. This action also disrespects senior, qualified Republican women who were passed over by Senator McCain in favor of an unqualified, junior woman. The Palin choice, an act of reverse sex discrimination, patently represents exploitation of women for political purposes. In this regard, that Sarah Palin herself chooses to accept the offer mystifies me and many others. Does she not realize that she is ill-prepared for the office and is being used by the Republican Party?

Captain McCain demeans and diminishes the Offices of the Vice President and President by selecting such an unqualified person. His decision demonstrates a certain cynicism and flippancy toward the highest offices in the United States of America. At this point in American history, our nation requires a president who can reassure the people in America — and the world — that he intends to return to responsible leadership. Does any objective person feel reassured?

The personnel safety nets for precluding disasters in assignments in both the military and corporate worlds are a finely-honed personnel system and highly qualified individuals making thoughtful decisions and assignments. What are the equivalent safety nets for our elected leaders? There are four: (1) elected officials, (2) major political parties, (3) the Fourth Estate (media), and finally, (4) the electorate.

John McCain’s vice presidential selection, Sarah Palin, has slipped through the first two personnel safety nets for elected high officials. It’s now up to the media and electorate to act as powerful safety nets.

In sum, Sarah Palin’s selection literally tests the strengths and stability of our American political system.

——————————————-
Commander Coye, served in three intelligence jobs and is a former commanding officer. She is a graduate of Wellesley College, the American University School of International Service and thetSchool of Naval Warfare (Naval War College). Coye taught Political Science and International Relations at the Naval War College and several undergraduate colleges. She co-authored “My Navy Too”, 1998, and resides in Ashland, Oregon.

The following was sent to Jim Lehrer of PBS. He needs to get Senator McCain to talk about his health.

Senator McCain’s health is critical to the future foreign and domestic policy of this country.

The voters need to understand, at least those willing to listen, that McCain’s cancer history makes it probable that his politically vetted VP could become the 45th president of this country. This is not what the country needs at this time. We don’t need more deregulation of commerce during an economic crash. We don’t need more preemptive foreign policy to continue the bankruptcy of this country as bin Laden has wanted. We don’t need conservative social values forced on the majority by a minority.

Palin is being prepped by a hoard of neocons to become a true puppet president. They will make sure her social values are matched with equal parts of their neoconservatism. If McCain suffers a serious relapse of melanoma, the neocons will have more control over this country’s future than they ever did under GWB. Combine the puppet and neocon puppeteer with Palin’s social values and beliefs and what comes next will become a disaster far bigger than any we have yet seen. McCain/Palin followed by Palin/Rove(?) will result in a form of government similar to what our founding forefathers rebelled against with Great Britain. https://the-wawg-blog.org/?p=664

Please ask Senator McCain to share is medical history in an informative fashion so that voters can cast a better informed vote.

There is an extreme faction on our State Board of Education (SBOE) that has a specific agenda that is not in the best interest of our children’s education. Incumbent board member David Bradley is a member of this extreme faction. He represents the seventh district on the SBOE, which includes Brazoria, Chambers, Galveston, Jefferson, and portions of Harris counties. The SBOE approves all public school curriculum and selects text books for our schools.

The Problem:

David Bradley is infamous among educators for stating “This critical thinking stuff is gobbledygook” while serving on the SBOE. He thinks that critical thinking is innate and therefore does not need to be taught. Also, Bradley’s staunch opposition to including comprehension as part of the state English curriculum is mind-boggling! He discounted the testimony from expert teachers and national experts in English and reading, he discounted the College Readiness Standards, and he discounted the advice of the Texas Education Agency-appointed writing teams in English and Language Arts He believes that if you just give students needed tools, they will naturally put them into sentences and paragraphs. Directed by Bradley’s efforts, the SBOE decided that the English curriculum for the 2008-2009 school year will not include reading comprehension.

The SBOE is dominated by the far right of whom Bradley is the de-facto leader. During Bradley’s watch, a textbook publisher was forced to remove a photo of a woman carrying a briefcase and replace it with a photo of a woman baking a cake. This school year, new science textbooks will be adopted. Mr. Bradley believes “the world is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs and humans coexisted.” I wonder what he will try to delete or impose on the science curriculum? Also, he thinks there is no need for curriculum specialists in schools. Bradley has never worked as a public school educator, but instead works in insurance. And while Bradley wants to continue to control public education, he does not send his children to public schools. He home-schooled his children; however, one of his sons did graduate from a public school.

David Bradley lives in Jasper which is not in the district he is running to represent, but is in district 8. He votes in Beaumont by using his business address in Beaumont. Why is David Bradley on the ballot for district 7 if he lives in district 8? Many witnesses were called to testify before a state level grand jury in Austin concerning him living in district 8, but running for office in district 7. The grand jury has not indicted nor have they no billed him. He has been indicted for open meetings violations dealing with the Permanent School Fund. It does not appear that he is eligible to be on the ballot, yet he has run in 2000, 2002, 2004 and 2008. Is this who we want to return to the SBOE?

The Solution:

In contrast to Bradley, his opponent Laura Ewing would bring balance to the SBOE. Laura has been a teacher for over 30 years. She has taught in Houston, Fort Bend, Clear Creek, Spring and Cypress-Fairbanks school districts. She also was a social studies specialist in Pearland ISD. She has been named “Teacher of the Year,” “Supervisor of the Year,” and has received the “Award for Excellence in the Teaching of Private Enterprise.” Laura also has a Masters in Educational Leadership and Cultural Studies from the University of Houston and is an Adjunct Professor at the University of Houston at Clear Lake. In addition, she was elected to the Friendswood City Council from 2003 where she served until 2008.

Laura believes that comprehension needs to be part of the English curriculum and that critical thinking is vital for our students. Laura would like to see a greater variety of credit courses for graduation in order to meet the needs of the different learning abilities of the population. She also believes that non-English speaking students should be offered English classes as they are studying their required classes. She also believes that non-college bound students need to be able to select classes that will help them become prepared to enter the work force when they graduate.

Laura Ewing is the hope for District 7 and for the state. She will help provide a solid education and bright future for all students in Texas. She has always put education first and will continue to do that on the SBOE!

We can’t leave the education of our children up to the far-right extremists!

What can you do to help?

Spread the word about Laura Ewing.

Volunteer and make a contribution. She needs money to get the word out to all the voters in district seven.

Links:

Ewing for Texas

Tribune article by Geoff Geiger

Texas Monthly article by Katy Vine

Laura Ewing Campaign

Netroots Outreach

The Lies About the Bridge to Nowhere – A new ad from John McCain’s presidential campaign contends his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, “stopped the Bridge to Nowhere.” In fact, Palin was for the infamous bridge before she was against it.

THE SPIN: Called “Original Mavericks,” the ad asserts the Republican senator has fought pork-barrel spending, the drug industry and fellow Republicans, reforming Washington in the process, and credits Palin with similarly changing Alaska by taking on the oil industry, challenging her own party and ditching the bridge project that became a national symbol of wasteful spending.

THE FACTS: Palin did abandon plans to build the nearly $400 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport. But she made her decision after the project had become an embarrassment to the state, after federal dollars for the project were pulled back and diverted to other uses in Alaska, and after she had appeared to support the bridge during her campaign for governor.

McCain/Palin and the Ten What? – The following is from a commenter on the ABC News Blog:

For the religious people that want to vote for McCain/Palin, consider the following:
Thou shalt not lie: they have lied
Thou shalt not kill: supports an unjust war
Thou shalt not commit adultery: McCain admits to affairs while married to his first wife, his last being with his current wife
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour: Continually lying
While no one is perfect, Republicans tend to pride themselves in being the more godly citizens. how godly is it if the leader you want has broken 40% of Gods laws?
Posted by: giovanni | Sep 10, 2008 9:57:24 AM

John McCain’s Ads Are LIES (Video Proof) – You’ve been reading the stories here about McCain’s ads for some time. Here’s video of the distortions presented in the ads along with video of the truth in context.

Regards,

Jim
Will you listen to your hopes or your fears?

Palin Billed State for Spending Thanksgiving at College Basketball Game, Husband’s Sled Race, and Numerous Nights Spent at Home – Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has billed taxpayers for 312 nights spent in her own home during her first 19 months in office, charging a “per diem” allowance intended to cover meals and incidental expenses while traveling on state business. Among these events included a college basketball game — and a sled race in which her husband competed. The governor also has charged the state for travel expenses to take her children on official out-of-town missions,” the paper added. “And her husband, Todd, has billed the state for expenses and a daily allowance for trips he makes on official business for his wife.

Palin Says the Iraq War and a Natural Gas Pipeline are Part of God’s Plan – In June, Palin addressed graduates of a youth ministry program at the Wasilla Assembly of God, saying the Iraq War and a natural gas pipeline she is trying to build as part of God’s plan.” A video produced by the church proclaims with apocalyptic imagery that “God has a destiny for the state of Alaska!” and in another clip someone from the church affirms, “I believe that Alaska’s one of the refuge states.”

Falsehoods in McCain’s Acceptance Speech – McCain’s speech accepting the Republican nomination contained the following falsehoods:

• McCain claimed that Obama’s health care plan would “force small businesses to cut jobs” and would put “a bureaucrat … between you and your doctor.” In fact, the plan exempts small businesses, and those who have insurance now could keep the coverage they have.
• McCain attacked Obama for voting for “corporate welfare” for oil companies. In fact, the bill Obama voted for raised taxes on oil companies by $300 million over 11 years while providing $5.8 billion in subsidies for renewable energy, energy efficiency and alternative fuels.
• McCain said oil imports send “$700 billion a year to countries that don’t like us very much.” But the U.S. is on track to import a total of only $536 billion worth of oil at current prices, and close to a third of that comes from Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom (only about $178 billion compared to McCain’s claim of $700 billion).
• McCain promised to increase use of “wind, tide [and] solar” energy, though his actual energy plan contains no new money for renewable energy. He has said elsewhere that renewable sources won’t produce as much as people think.
• McCain called for “reducing government spending and getting rid of failed programs,” but as in the past failed to cite a single program that he would eliminate or reduce.
• He said Obama would “close” markets to trade. In fact, Obama, though he once said he wanted to “renegotiate” the North American Free Trade Agreement, now says he simply wants to try to strengthen environmental and labor provisions in it.

Gov. Palin Hiding Husband’s Correspondence Related to Trooper Union – Dozens of e-mails exchanged among several government employees and Todd Palin, the husband of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin who has no formal role in her administration, are not being turned over in response to an open records request in the state. In June, Andrée McLeod, a self-described independent government watchdog in Alaska, sent an open records act request to the office of Governor Sarah Palin. She requested copies of all the emails that had been sent and received by Ivy Frye and Frank Bailey, two top aides to Palin, from February through April of this year. McLeod, a 53-year-old registered Republican who has held various jobs in state government, suspected that Frye and Bailey had engaged in political activity during official business hours in that period by participating in a Palin-backed effort to oust the state chairman of the Alaska Republican party, Randy Ruedrich.

Endangered Species Act to be Weaken to the Point of Nonexistence Unless You Act Now! – The Endangered Species Act is our primary legal tool for environmental protection. We have until September 15–about a week–to save the Endangered Species Act. Not just some species, but the Act itself! Bush administration officials are proposing redefinitions of terms that would allow conservative appointees in federal agencies to virtually the destroy the Act.

Their goal is to allow proposed projects to proceed even if such projects would kill off endangered species or place them or their habitats in jeopardy.

Causation, within an ecological system, is almost always systemic in nature. That is, there are disparate contributing causes with disparate contributed effects in various places at different times. Direct causation is rare. Direct causation occurs when there is a single act at a given time and place that results in a single effect at that time and place. For example, a species of frog limited to a local wetland could be completely wiped out by a condo development with that wetland filled in. Direct causation.
But frogs around the country are dying out due to a complex combination of factors in different places at different times. Systemic causation.

The present Endangered Species Act is realistic about systemic causation: disparate causes that contribute to disparate future effects count as “causation.” But imagine what would happen if “causation” were redefined to mean only direct causation. Development projects now forbidden because they contribute significantly to future disparate loss of species and species habitat would now be allowed. Lots and lots of disparate projects at disparate places and times would be allowed. Their collective systemic effects could wipe out a great many habitats and species.

This is exactly what is being proposed by the Departments of the Interior and Commerce, as published in the Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 159 / Friday, August 15, 2008 / Proposed Rules. They want to redefine causation so that only direct causation (they call it “an essential cause”) counts as causation that jeopardizes the existence of a species listed under the Endangered Species act, or jeopardizes that species’ critical habitat. The effect is that proposed development projects can contribute significantly to the destruction of habitat and the extinction of species, provided that they do not directly cause the elimination of a species, or directly reduce the population of a species or extent of its habitat–something that rarely happens. The result is that almost all proposed developments that were previously understood as “causes” of habitat destruction or species extinction will no longer be seen as “causes” at all and will be permitted. The reason will be that “cause” itself will have been redefined.
Act Now!

Here are some Talking Points:

• You are against the proposed rule changes because they weaken the Endangered Species Act nearly to the point of nonexistence.
• Environmental systems mostly work by systemic causation, with many indirect causes, not by “essential causation.” The change to “essential causation” opens the door to an indefinitely large number of projects that can jointly put endangered species in jeopardy.
• The change in “consultation” rules will de facto eliminate the gathering of information relevant to protecting species.

Here’s how you get your comments read: Go to www.regulations.gov and use the search terms: “50 CFR Part 402 proposed rule”.

The proposed changes are in Document # EB – 18938
To see the proposed changes, click on “View this document”
Click on “Send a comment or submission” to write your comment.

Note that plain e-mails will not be considered. This is another way public input is being limited.

Write your comments before September 15, 2008.

Sarah Palin Fired Legislative Director Just Seven Weeks After She Praised His Work – Sarah Palin and John Bitney go way back. They were in the same junior-high band class. Mr. Bitney was a key aide in Gov. Palin’s 2006 gubernatorial campaign. When she took office, she gave Mr. Bitney a job as her legislative director, and a few months later stood beside him at a news conference and praised his work.

“Whatever you did, you did it right,” she told Mr. Bitney and his team.
Seven weeks later she fired Mr. Bitney for what her spokeswoman now describes as “poor job performance.”

What happened in between? According to Mr. Bitney, Gov. Palin got a call from another old friend, Scott Richter, informing her that his wife, Debbie Richter, and Mr. Bitney were having an affair. Mr. Bitney had kept that secret from the governor, even as he told her of his divorce, he said.

When Gov. Palin was notified by Mr. Richter in July 2007, she called Mr. Bitney into her office. She already knew he was going through a divorce, and, Mr. Bitney said, he had “led her to believe there weren’t going to be any more surprises.”

Mr. Bitney said the governor “indicated to me that she was hurt, disappointed and upset, and that she didn’t know what she wanted to do.”

A few days later, Gov. Palin’s chief of staff “indicated to me that I needed to leave the governor’s office,” Mr. Bitney said.

While Palin’s office framed the departure as an “amicable” mutual decision, Bitney told Politico that Sarah and Todd Palin “were upset with me about my divorce and who I was dating, and they didn’t want that in the governor’s office.”

More details

More Misrepresentations About Palin and How Alaska Gets Your Money – Palin has continued to repeat the already exposed lie that she said, “No, thanks,” to the famous “bridge to nowhere” (McCain’s favorite example of wasteful federal spending). In fact, she said, “Yes, please,” until this project became a symbol and political albatross.

Back to reality. Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 21/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska’s government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it. Although Palin, like McCain, talks about liberating ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, there is no evidence that being dependent on Alaskan oil would be any more pleasant to the pocketbook.
Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state’s unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state. Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can’t afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears.

As if it couldn’t support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.

College Students in Virginia Being Discouraged From Voting – According to this press release from the extremely important battleground state of Virginia, students are being told that they risk losing their scholarship and tax dependency status if they register to vote in their college, as opposed to home, state. And it appears all these warnings are bogus and have one impact and one impact only: to suppress voter turnout among college-aged people, who are overwhelmingly supporting Obama this year.

Regards,

Jim
Will you listen to your hopes or your fears?

Let’s go back in time a few weeks, return to the present and then look to a probably future if McCain and Palin win in 2008.

Shortly before the recently-closed party conventions, there was some discussion and speculation of a “one and done” McCain presidency. This discussion was fed by statements by McCain’s campaign chief Rick Davis who refused to rule out the possibility on Fox News when he said, “you’re going to have to come to the convention,” implying something would be said there. However — nothing was said and won’t be either.

However, is a “One and Done” or even shorter McCain presidency still possible?

According to Rick Moran’s American Thinkers article and “many pros,” a one-term McCain is a “horrible idea.” Moran expanded on this:

… First of all, it tends to highlight rather than obscure the age issue – something the Obama camp will seize on immediately and hammer McCain on daily. Secondly, it really would mean that McCain would be a lame duck the moment he took the oath. Presidents get as much done by being feared as they do being loved. Take away the fear factor and getting politicians to go along with you becomes an exercise in herding cats. McCain could fight for his issues all he wants but it would do him little good if the Congress knew he would be gone in 2012.

Also, it would put an enormous burden on his Vice Presidential nominee. He will be vetted by both the Obama campaign and the press as a potential president, not Vice President. For four years, the White House beat will have two subjects; the president and the probable GOP nominee in 2012. That can only detract from McCain’s presidency.

This is all fine and makes sense assuming one thing — that McCain wants to stay in office, when and if he is sworn in. What if he doesn’t?

What if he never really expected to get nominated? What if he never really wanted to be nominated? What if the pressure of the campaign is wearing him out and he sees four years as president just too much? What if the reality of the job finally sets in? What if he shared these inner concerns and feelings with only the closest of his lobbyist/neocon supporters? What if these close ‘friends’ saw an opportunity and suggested a plan to ‘help him out’ and ‘bring in someone’ more acceptable to the Republican base? His friends are ready. They tell him they have someone who would help bring back the base whom they need to win. John McCain agrees. A short time passes, the Democrat convention is about to end and Republicans need to roadblock any possible enemy gains from that convention. They tell McCain who they found for his VP and we have all now been introduced to Sarah Palin.

Now off to a future possible McCain/Palin administration.

John McCain has to keep a promise to his friends, becomes seriously ill or just tires of the pressure of the toughest job in the country? Palin has gained some additional ‘executive’ experience and has paid close attention to her Chief of Staff, Karl Rove. John McCain announces he is stepping down within 90 days and Palin will take over at that time.

The talk before the conventions was about John McCain possibly promising to be a one-term president. Now the talk should be about a shortened McCain presidency with Palin becoming our first national leader whose allegiance to the citizens is limited to the social conservative minority. Imagine the executive orders on separation of church and state, abortion, homosexuality, and marriage.

We DO NOT NEED a right-wing authoritarian, who believes that church and state should work as one, leading this country. This is not what our forefathers fought for in the 1700’s.

Sarah Palin Supports Brutal Aerial Hunting – Aerial hunting is a brutal practice where wolves are shot from low-flying aircraft or chased to exhaustion, then killed at point-blank range.

Governor Sarah Palin, the Republican nominee for Vice President, promotes this barbaric practice, exploiting a loophole in the Federal Airborne Hunting Act to allow private wolf killers to shoot down wolves using aircraft.

Please watch this powerful video by Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund, and then share it with every wildlife lover you know:

McCain’s Temper – One more example of McCain’s temper. In Washington, families of POW_MIAs said they have seen McCain’s wrath repeatedly. Some families charged that McCain hadn’t been aggressive enough about pursuing their lost relatives and has been reluctant to release relevant documents. McCain himself was a prisoner of war for five-and-a-half years during the Vietnam War.

In 1992, McCain sparred with Dolores Alfond, the chairwoman of the National Alliance of Families for the Return of America’s Missing Servicemen and Women, at a Senate hearing. McCain’s prosecutor-like questioning of Alfond left her in tears.

Four years later, at her group’s Washington conference, about 25 members went to a Senate office building, hoping to meet with McCain. As they stood in the hall, McCain and an aide walked by.

Six people present have written statements describing what they saw. According to the accounts, McCain waved his hand to shoo away Jeannette Jenkins, whose cousin was last seen in South Vietnam in 1970, causing her to hit a wall.

As McCain continued walking, Jane Duke Gaylor, the mother of another missing serviceman, approached the senator. Gaylor, in a wheelchair equipped with portable oxygen, stretched her arms toward McCain.

“McCain stopped, glared at her, raised his left arm ready to strike her, composed himself and pushed the wheelchair away from him,” according to Eleanor Apodaca, the sister of an Air Force captain missing since 1967.

And as Mitt Romney’s campaign revealed in January, those McCain tirades are directed at friend and foe alike.

Independent experts have some concerns about McCain’s irascibility.

“Diplomacy is not often dealing with reasonable people,” said Steve Clemons, an analyst at the New America Foundation, a centrist public policy group.

“In the nuclear age, you don’t want someone flying off the handle, so it’s a critical question: Can McCain control his temper?” asked Thomas De Luca, professor of political science at Fordham University in New York.

More examples :

Regards,

Jim