Posted on 02/06/2014 5:59:05 AM PST by xzins
The man should be removed from office. He can’t tell enemy from friend.
Both at home and abroad.
No, McCain has always been known for his nasty temper. He's not some doddering old guy who isn't responsible for his actions. He's just a venomous, mean SOB.
Time for the old bastard to go to Hospice ...
It’s a wonder the others didn’t storm out behind McPain so he could lead them to the nearest TV camera. People in AZ must be truly insane.
The whole thing may have been pre-arranged so that Lovable Lindsey could look “reasonable” for his uninformed SC constituents.
I can’t imagine that even Linda wants to remind folks in conservative SCarolina that this McCain guy who supports terrorists murdering Christians in Syria is his best buddy.
We know SC people are uninformed, or otherwise Lindsey would be running last in their field of Senate candidates.
I read somewhere that even Nancy Davis Reagan hold McPain in low esteem at least off the record. But not as low as she holds Oliver North
Judicial Watch really needs to fact-check its stories to avoid obvious errors like this . . .
That this situation is deadly for Syrian Christians, who have been protected by Assad, will be slaughtered by the "Islamic Moderate" rebels seems not to concern McCain.
He should never be in a position of leadership much less in a position that means life or death for Christians being protected by Assad,
Oh McCain.....You've done it again!!!
Is there a way for a citizen from Arizona to request test be done on McCain to see if he’s stable?
We talk about Obama being thin skinned. maccain is right up there with him. Neither have ever made a mistake.
McCain needs to retire. We’ll probably find out later he’s banging O’Bagy.
McCain is one of those atheists who hate Christians. It’s just that simple.
From now on I’m calling him “Big Fatty Face” like in the commercial.
What are the errors?
The statement "Graham is a republican and the rest are Democrats" could be more accurate and say "Graham is a NeoCon Republican and the rest are Liberal Interventionist Democrats". Saying it that way, the statement identifies which political party each is in as well as which foreign policy they subscribe to.
The issue, arming the Syrian rebels, is not about political parties, it is about foreign policy doctrine.
What do the NeoCons(R) think?
What do the Liberal Interventionists(D) think?
What so the Realists(R & D) think?
What do the Isolationists(R) think?
What do the Antiwar Pacifists(D) think.
In the spring of 2013 the Senate Foreign Relations Committee took a vote on whether or not to arm the Syrian Rebels. The committee voted 15 to 3 to arm the rebels. 15 republicans and democrats voted to arm the rebels and 3 republicans and democrats(2 dems plus 1 pub) voted against arming the rebels.
The committee vote was along doctrinal lines, not political party lines. The NeoCons, Realists, and Liberal Interventionists on the committee voted to arm the rebels. The Antiwar Pacifists and Isolationists on the committee voted against arming the rebels.
The people of the state of Arizona need to apologize for that it is THEIR fault.
There are no good guys fighting on either side of the Syrian conflict, but we are definitely funding the bad guys, which is insanity.
I wonder how bad a choice over him Obama truly was. Seems to me they were running neck and neck for worse selection for president in recorded US history.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.