Obama cancels a visit to a Military Base in Germany.

McCain spokesman…

“Barack Obama is wrong. It is never ‘inappropriate’ to visit our men and women in the military,” McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in response to the news.

Meanwhile, now the PENTAGON has chimed in…

A campaign adviser said the U.S. military saw the visit as a campaign stop.

“We learned from the Pentagon last night that the visit would be viewed instead as a campaign event,” the adviser, retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, said in a statement. “Senator Obama did not want to have a trip to see our wounded warriors perveived as a campaign event when his visit was to show his appreciation for our troops and decided instead not to go.”

That is because…

The Pentagon in a statement cited longstanding Defense Department policy that prohibits military personnel or facilities from association with partisan political campaigns and elections.

“We told him he could visit Landstuhl (Regional Medical Center in western Germany) with his Senate staff, but not with his campaign staff,” said Army Lt. Col. Elizabeth Hibner.

Now why did the McCain campaign opt to blast Obama on this???

Back in April…

With Department of Defense rules prohibiting political campaigning on military bases, it was determined that in some cases McCain could visit the installations as a senator but could not engage in any political activity or have news media present.
McCain campaign officials said Thursday they intentionally did not campaign on military property.

“We follow the rules,” said senior McCain adviser Steve Schmidt.

So AGAIN……… it appears to be ok if McCain does it, but if Obama does it he obviously hates America.

The McCain “Double-Talk Express” is getting more laughable.

McCain is whining because Obama made a speech in a foreign country as a mere Presidential candidate.

McCain says?

“I’d love to give a speech in Germany … a political speech or a speech that maybe the German people would be interested in, but I’d much prefer to do it as president of the United States rather than as a candidate … for the office of presidency,” McCain told reporters in Ohio.

Meanwhile not even a month ago McCain said this of this trip to Latin America?

Going to Latin America in the midst of a presidential campaign, he said, speaks less to his role as a senator than to what he’s hoping to achieve if elected this fall. “It’s more my ability to govern as president,” he said, “my ability to lead as president, to keep up with these major issues.”

So WTF??? Why is it ok for him to do it, but not for Obama to do it? Why is it ok for McCain?s surrogates to say something stupid, but not for Obama?s? Why is it ok for McCain to have ?evolving opinions?, but when Obama changes, it is a flip-flop and a horrible thing?

Then there is this from McCain?s own website?

ARLINGTON, VA — Today, McCain 2008 spokesman Tucker Bounds issued the following statement on Barack Obama’s speech in Germany today:
“While Barack Obama took a premature victory lap today in the heart of Berlin, proclaiming himself a ‘citizen of the world,’ John McCain continued to make his case to the American citizens who will decide this election. Barack Obama offered eloquent praise for this country, but the contrast is clear. John McCain has dedicated his life to serving, improving and protecting America. Barack Obama spent an afternoon talking about it.”

Damn that Obama! In this campaign he shouldn?t just talk about protecting America! He should get his ass out there with a gun!!! That comment from the McCain spokesman is just foolish.

Is it November yet for cryin? out loud???

Obama today:

“My whole goal in terms of having tough, serious direct diplomacy is not because I’m naive about the nature of any of these regimes. I’m not,” Obama said at a press conference. “It is because if we show ourselves willing to talk and to offer carrots and sticks in order to deal with these pressing problems, and if Iran then rejects any overtures of that sort, it puts us in a stronger position to mobilize the international community to ratchet up the pressure on Iran.”

Hmm… sounds like something I’ve said before.

Then there is this on Obama’s meetings…

His [Obama's] meeting with the Palestinians stands in contrast to the decision by Republican presidential hopeful John McCain to visit only Israel in March, without stopping in the West Bank.

That sure reeks of “blah blah blah I don’t want to talk to mean people” from the McCain camp. This is certainly following the Bush theory of never talking with or even acknowledging the enemy.

I think people are starting to realize that conversations are actually more powerful than sabre-rattling.

If you read thru the Iraq section, it still doesn’t lay anything out. One would think that he would at least put something on the web site about his plans.
Instead, the website only has generalities… “We must continue until we win” and “Obama is for losing”, etc.

This is his plan…

John McCain believes it is strategically and morally essential for the United States to support the Government of Iraq to become capable of governing itself and safeguarding its people. He strongly disagrees with those who advocate withdrawing American troops before that has occurred.
It would be a grave mistake to leave before Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated and before a competent, trained, and capable Iraqi security force is in place and operating effectively.

AQ in Iraq is defeated? Is someone from AQ in Iraq going to actually surrender or does this mean that every last terrorist must be killed? What exactly does it mean to “defeat” them? Is it even possible to kill every last terrorist?
Plus… we’ve been fed the same bull for the last 4 years that the Iraqi military is getting stronger and taking the lead. Are they or aren’t they? If they are, then it is time to draw down. If they are not, then why the hell not after this many years???

Another thing he says regarding the surge that he is so proud of…

Those gains would be lost if we were to follow the policy advocated by Senator Barack Obama to withdraw most of our troops and leave behind only a small “strike force” to battle terrorists. That is, in essence, the same strategy of withdrawing from Iraq’s streets that failed in 2006. John McCain advocates continuing the successful counterinsurgency strategy that began in 2007.

Notice that he even says here that Obama is not saying to bring out ALL the troops.

Then about the Iraq political piece…

The key condition for successful elections is for American troops to continue to work with brave Iraqis to allow the voting to take place in relative freedom and security. Iraqis need to know that the U.S. will not abandon them, but will continue to press their politicians to show the necessary leadership to help develop their country.

Nobody is claiming that we should “abandon them”. See previous blockquote… “leave behind a small ‘strike force’”. I believe Democratic plans for the last 3 years have been to redeploy troops to the horizon (i.e. Kumait, etc). Close enough to be a force, but far enough to allow the Iraqis to take ownership of their own affairs.

I would welcome the Media to actually report on issues and to stop playing “gotcha” when a politician flubs a comment. If McCain has talking in specific plans, then I would welcome hearing about it.

Just saying we are winning and we must win is not a plan. Especially when so many neocons have claimed this for the last 5 years and have even declared victory a couple of times.

None of this is going to solve things politically. Iraq can take ownership of their own issues once we force them to by saying we are starting to draw down.