Has it really come to this? A presidential nominee citing the geographic proximity of Alaska in relation to Russia in order to defend his VP choice a
Has it really come to this? A presidential nominee citing the geographic proximity of Alaska in relation to Russia in order to defend his VP choice and argue that she has relevant foreign policy experience? John and Cindy must be drinking the same kool-aid.
GIBSON: Can you honestly say you feel confident having someone who hasn't traveled outside the United States until last year, dealing with an insurgent Russia, with an Iran with nuclear ambitions, with an unstable Pakistan, not to mention the war on terror?
MCCAIN: Sure. And one of the key elements of America's national security requirements are energy. She understands the energy issues better than anybody I know in Washington, D.C., and she understands. Alaska is right next to Russia. She understands that.
As it that weren't enough, John McCain offers one of the most deceptive lines of his entire campaign, stressing four times that Alaska is America's "largest state." Geographically speaking, yes, McCain is right. But in real terms -- such as population (683,478) and nominal GDP ($44 million) -- Alaska ranks near the very bottom, at 47th and 45th, respectively. These semantic games are laughable. I wonder if the campaign realizes how foolish he sounds.
Another amazing quote:
"So she is experienced. She's talented. She knows how to lead and she has been vetted by the people of the state of Alaska. But most importantly, people in America want change. They don't want somebody from inside the beltway."
If the American people want change -- which is the one thing in the entire interview John McCain actually gets right -- why the hell would they elect someone who has been part of the Washington establishment for 25 years?!?!!!? Does he even hear the words that are coming out of his mouth?
But wait, we're not done. Check out this one:
GIBSON: But you criticized, for a long time, Sen. Obama based on his lack of experience. [...] Jan. 6, I'm quoting you, "Sen. Obama does not have the national security experience and background to be president."
↓ Story continues below ↓
MCCAIN: I said he didn't have the judgment.
GIBSON: Sarah Palin does?
MCCAIN: I said that he didn't have the judgment. He doesn't have the judgment. He didn't have the judgment on Iraq. He still refuses to acknowledge that the surge has succeeded. Gov. Palin knows the surge has succeeded. She's the commander of the Alaskan National Guard. He said that Iran was a tiny problem. He's never visited south of our border. He has no experience on these issues.
Leave aside for the moment the fact that John McCain is just spitting out nonsensical one-line lies, and focus on the two bits I highlighted. John McCain seems to believe that the history of our involvement in Iraq begins in January 2007, when the surge began. Because if we go back to the real start of the war in 2002, he would look like a fool saying Obama doesn't have the judgment on Iraq considering he predicted exactly what the consequences of an invasion would entail. Secondly, and this is a talking point that needs to be forcefully blown out the water, Sarah Palin has NOTHING/ZERO/ZILCH/NADA to do with "commanding the Alaskan National Guard." It's a nice-sounding talking point, but it is a bald-faced LIE.
Either John McCain is dumb, or he thinks we are. Either way, he and Sarah Palin are unfit to serve.