McCain v. Bachmann on Abedim

[CLARENCE 2015!]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/mccain-defends-clinton-aide-huma-abedin-against-house-gop-charges-of-muslim-brotherhood-scheme/

I was proud when I saw this live earlier today... I am no fan of some of the policies pursued by the Clinton State Department and advanced by Ms. Abedim but Bachmann's attack (I am embarrased to say it was cosigned by a Congressman I've donated to) is un-American and deserved to be called such by an American hero

[TJ in Oregon]

Some days I wish John McCain had run for president again.

[CLARENCE 2015!]

Some days I wish John McCain had run for president again.

Every day I wish he'd won!

[Comrade Funk]

I really wish the DFL and Independence parties in Minnesota would make a deal to get this person out of congress. She's an embarassment to this country.

+1 for McCain.

[Vosem]

I've been a loyal supporter of McCain since the 2008 primaries and my only regret is he lost to Obama.

Some days I wish John McCain had run for president again.

Every day I wish he'd won!

This. This, so much.

[King]

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/07/mccain-defends-clinton-aide-huma-abedin-against-house-gop-charges-of-muslim-brotherhood-scheme/

I was proud when I saw this live earlier today... I am no fan of some of the policies pursued by the Clinton State Department and advanced by Ms. Abedim but Bachmann's attack (I am embarrased to say it was cosigned by a Congressman I've donated to) is un-American and deserved to be called such by an American hero

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The usual suspects.  I wonder if they all sleep with the lights on.

[Simfan34]

This is why I liked McCain in the first place. He'd make a far better candidate than Romney, but that's obvious.

[CultureKing]

Good for McCain, it's nice to see someone within the party standing up to the crazies for once.

[Dr. Cynic]

Kudos to McCain. I wouldn't have voted for him, but he took a principled stand and I applaud him for it.

[Holmes]

People need to realize that candidate McCain is different from senator McCain, and that senator McCain even comes in many different flavours depending on month, day, year, even the time of day and location.

[President von Cat]

What are the chances she'll lose her seat on the Intelligence Committee?

And who exactly let her get on it in the first place?

So sick of this idiot and all of her bullsh*t.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

I watched John McCain on Pierce Morgan last night.  It almost looks as though the 2000 McCain is coming back.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

People need to realize that candidate McCain is different from senator McCain, and that senator McCain even comes in many different flavours depending on month, day, year, even the time of day and location.

This

[Simfan34]

People need to realize that candidate McCain is different from senator McCain, and that senator McCain even comes in many different flavours depending on month, day, year, even the time of day and location.

No. McCain is a great American and politician, for once.

What are the chances she'll lose her seat on the Intelligence Committee?

And who exactly let her get on it in the first place?

So sick of this idiot and all of her bullsh*t.

The fact she is on the  Intelligence Committee is contradictory in and of itself.

[WhyteRain]

Hmmm ... I'm reading the story linked in the OP and something bothers me.  McCain keeps using the word "unsubstantiated", not the word "false" or "untrue".

First, the charge (at least what's quoted in the story):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd like to know what "connected to" means in that charge -- and what's the point of the "and/or organizations"?  The Muslim Brotherhood is an organization, so "and/or organizations" seems superfluous.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hmmm ... I guess I'd have to look at the report.  Though I have to say, I doubt the MB dreamed it could have been so successful in such a short time -- with US backing** -- just a few short years ago.

OK, now let's see Sen. McCain's complaint:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm always bothered when the "defense" to charges of wrongdoing is that they are "unsubstantiated" or "baseless".  That's far from saying "they're untrue".  It makes me think that, with some investigation, maybe we could determine if there is any "substance" or "basis" for the charges. 

But that's just me.

I see that Bachmann's response was to encourage "everyone" to read the pertinent documents.  Sounds reasonable.  I think I will.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

** From the LA Times a few days ago:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Simfan34]

What, did you want her to condemn the democratically elected leader?

[MaxQue]

What, did you want her to condemn the democratically elected leader?

Well, for some people, democracy is good as long it gives the desired results.

[WhyteRain]

What, did you want her to condemn the democratically elected leader?

That's a red herring.

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Ask me if I'm surprised we witnessed the spectacle of an American Sec of State being pelted with eggs for the first time ever in Egypt -- and for the first time in memory anywhere else.

Good grief.  I just googled for "when was the last time a U.S. secretary of state was pelted with eggs" and learned -- thanks for covering this MSM! -- that protestors in Manila did the same thing to Hillary's limo just last Fall.  Other than CNN and, of course, some rightwing internet media, it looks like the news was completely suppressed here in the States.

No wonder the Obamabots think he's "made us more respected around the world".

[MaxQue]

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Oh, you mean presenting a puppet candidate and funding him, while hiding that to voters?

[WhyteRain]

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Oh, you mean presenting a puppet candidate and funding him, while hiding that to voters?

I've not heard that information, but I'm interested in learning more.  Do you have a link?

[MaxQue]

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Oh, you mean presenting a puppet candidate and funding him, while hiding that to voters?

I've not heard that information, but I'm interested in learning more.  Do you have a link?

No, I'm just saying than the US used that strategy at some points in the past.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What, did you want her to condemn the democratically elected leader?

That's a red herring.

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Simple. They didn't. Why on Earth would they have, unless they wanted Shafik?

[WhyteRain]

What, did you want her to condemn the democratically elected leader?

That's a red herring.

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Simple. They didn't. Why on Earth would they have, unless they wanted Shafik?

Why wouldn't the Obama Admin want the MB to win?  They seemed happy enough when it did.

And, yes, by calling for Mubarek's immediate resignation they ensured there would be no "breathing room" between the Jan 2011 anti-Mubarek uprising and the already-scheduled Sep 2011 elections for a secular, non=Mubarek opposition to get organized.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

What, did you want her to condemn the democratically elected leader?

That's a red herring.

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

Simple. They didn't. Why on Earth would they have, unless they wanted Shafik?

Why wouldn't the Obama Admin want the MB to win?  They seemed happy enough when it did.

And, yes, by calling for Mubarek's immediate resignation they ensured there would be no "breathing room" between the Jan 2011 anti-Mubarek uprising and the already-scheduled Sep 2011 elections for a secular, non=Mubarek opposition to get organized.

No, I'm asking you why would they want the Ikhwan to win? Until and unless you give some sort of comprehensible foreign policy reason for the Obama administration to root for an organization that gave the world Sayyid Qutb among other people I'm going to assume you don't have one. They 'seemed happy enough' because the Ikhwan won a democratic election, which in case you didn't notice was the first in Egypt, ever.

They called for Mubarak's immediate resignation because there was a revolution against him and he was clubbing demonstrators in the streets. How in God's name was there less 'breathing room' between February 2011 and May 2012, even under a thermidorean government, than there would have been between February 2011 and September of the same year under the original dictator, anyway?

[Simfan34]

Of more interest is how Obama (or Hillary, acting on his instructions?) did what was necessary to ensure there would be no secular, non-Mubarek-connected opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood in the elections.

And why would they have done that?